Search (549 results, page 28 of 28)

4.87049E-4 = product of:
  0.002922294 = sum of:
    0.002922294 = product of:
      0.01461147 = sum of:
        0.01461147 = weight(_text_:28 in 44) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.01461147 = score(doc=44,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.12305808 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5822632 = idf(docFreq=3342, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03435205 = queryNorm
            0.11873637 = fieldWeight in 44, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5822632 = idf(docFreq=3342, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0234375 = fieldNorm(doc=44)
      0.2 = coord(1/5)
  0.16666667 = coord(1/6)

Date

28. 5.2005 17:15:30

4.6964764E-4 = product of:
  0.0028178857 = sum of:
    0.0028178857 = product of:
      0.014089429 = sum of:
        0.014089429 = weight(_text_:29 in 1195) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.014089429 = score(doc=1195,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.12083977 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03435205 = queryNorm
            0.11659596 = fieldWeight in 1195, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0234375 = fieldNorm(doc=1195)
      0.2 = coord(1/5)
  0.16666667 = coord(1/6)

Abstract

As follow up, in 2002 the nestor long-term archiving working group provided an initial spark towards planning and organising coordinated activities concerning the long-term preservation and long-term availability of digital documents in Germany. This resulted in a workshop, held 29 - 30 October 2002, where major tasks were discussed. Influenced by the demands and progress of the nestor network, the participants reached agreement to start work on application-oriented projects and to address the following topics: * Overlapping problems o Collection and preservation of digital objects (selection criteria, preservation policy) o Definition of criteria for trusted repositories o Creation of models of cooperation, etc. * Digital objects production process o Analysis of potential conflicts between production and long-term preservation o Documentation of existing document models and recommendations for standards models to be used for long-term preservation o Identification systems for digital objects, etc. * Transfer of digital objects o Object data and metadata o Transfer protocols and interoperability o Handling of different document types, e.g. dynamic publications, etc. * Long-term preservation of digital objects o Design and prototype implementation of depot systems for digital objects (OAIS was chosen to be the best functional model.) o Authenticity o Functional requirements on user interfaces of an depot system o Identification systems for digital objects, etc. At the end of the workshop, participants decided to establish a permanent distributed infrastructure for long-term preservation and long-term accessibility of digital resources in Germany comparable, e.g., to the Digital Preservation Coalition in the UK. The initial phase, nestor, is now being set up by the above-mentioned 3-year funding project.

4.6542284E-4 = product of:
  0.002792537 = sum of:
    0.002792537 = product of:
      0.013962685 = sum of:
        0.013962685 = weight(_text_:22 in 5988) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.013962685 = score(doc=5988,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.120295025 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03435205 = queryNorm
            0.116070345 = fieldWeight in 5988, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0234375 = fieldNorm(doc=5988)
      0.2 = coord(1/5)
  0.16666667 = coord(1/6)

Date

10. 9.2006 17:22:54

4.6542284E-4 = product of:
  0.002792537 = sum of:
    0.002792537 = product of:
      0.013962685 = sum of:
        0.013962685 = weight(_text_:22 in 1184) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.013962685 = score(doc=1184,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.120295025 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03435205 = queryNorm
            0.116070345 = fieldWeight in 1184, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0234375 = fieldNorm(doc=1184)
      0.2 = coord(1/5)
  0.16666667 = coord(1/6)

Date

26.12.2011 14:08:22

4.6542284E-4 = product of:
  0.002792537 = sum of:
    0.002792537 = product of:
      0.013962685 = sum of:
        0.013962685 = weight(_text_:22 in 3035) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.013962685 = score(doc=3035,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.120295025 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03435205 = queryNorm
            0.116070345 = fieldWeight in 3035, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0234375 = fieldNorm(doc=3035)
      0.2 = coord(1/5)
  0.16666667 = coord(1/6)

Content

As the team describe in a paper posted (http://arxiv.org/abs/1605.04951) on arXiv, they found that figures did indeed matter-but not all in the same way. An average paper in PubMed Central has about one diagram for every three pages and gets 1.67 citations. Papers with more diagrams per page and, to a lesser extent, plots per page tended to be more influential (on average, a paper accrued two more citations for every extra diagram per page, and one more for every extra plot per page). By contrast, including photographs and equations seemed to decrease the chances of a paper being cited by others. That agrees with a study from 2012, whose authors counted (by hand) the number of mathematical expressions in over 600 biology papers and found that each additional equation per page reduced the number of citations a paper received by 22%. This does not mean that researchers should rush to include more diagrams in their next paper. Dr Howe has not shown what is behind the effect, which may merely be one of correlation, rather than causation. It could, for example, be that papers with lots of diagrams tend to be those that illustrate new concepts, and thus start a whole new field of inquiry. Such papers will certainly be cited a lot. On the other hand, the presence of equations really might reduce citations. Biologists (as are most of those who write and read the papers in PubMed Central) are notoriously mathsaverse. If that is the case, looking in a physics archive would probably produce a different result.

4.6542284E-4 = product of:
  0.002792537 = sum of:
    0.002792537 = product of:
      0.013962685 = sum of:
        0.013962685 = weight(_text_:22 in 405) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.013962685 = score(doc=405,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.120295025 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03435205 = queryNorm
            0.116070345 = fieldWeight in 405, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0234375 = fieldNorm(doc=405)
      0.2 = coord(1/5)
  0.16666667 = coord(1/6)

Source

Frontiers in ecology and evolution, 22 October 2021 [https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fevo.2021.742639/full]

4.0587422E-4 = product of:
  0.0024352453 = sum of:
    0.0024352453 = product of:
      0.012176226 = sum of:
        0.012176226 = weight(_text_:28 in 4232) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.012176226 = score(doc=4232,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.12305808 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5822632 = idf(docFreq=3342, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03435205 = queryNorm
            0.09894698 = fieldWeight in 4232, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5822632 = idf(docFreq=3342, maxDocs=44218)
              0.01953125 = fieldNorm(doc=4232)
      0.2 = coord(1/5)
  0.16666667 = coord(1/6)

Date

30. 4.2018 14:39:28

3.9137306E-4 = product of:
  0.0023482384 = sum of:
    0.0023482384 = product of:
      0.011741191 = sum of:
        0.011741191 = weight(_text_:29 in 4393) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.011741191 = score(doc=4393,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.12083977 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03435205 = queryNorm
            0.097163305 = fieldWeight in 4393, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
              0.01953125 = fieldNorm(doc=4393)
      0.2 = coord(1/5)
  0.16666667 = coord(1/6)

Source

http://www.cba.neu.edu/uploadedFiles/Site_Sections/OLKC_2010/Program_Overview/Parallel_Sessions/180_Wyssusek_Abstract_Ontologies%20in%20Knowledge%20Management%281%29.pdf

3.878524E-4 = product of:
  0.0023271143 = sum of:
    0.0023271143 = product of:
      0.011635572 = sum of:
        0.011635572 = weight(_text_:22 in 4610) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.011635572 = score(doc=4610,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.120295025 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03435205 = queryNorm
            0.09672529 = fieldWeight in 4610, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.01953125 = fieldNorm(doc=4610)
      0.2 = coord(1/5)
  0.16666667 = coord(1/6)

Date

24.10.2008 14:19:22