Search (5 results, page 1 of 1)

0.009055755 = product of:
  0.045278773 = sum of:
    0.045278773 = product of:
      0.090557545 = sum of:
        0.090557545 = weight(_text_:22 in 4686) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.090557545 = score(doc=4686,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.14628662 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04177434 = queryNorm
            0.61904186 = fieldWeight in 4686, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.125 = fieldNorm(doc=4686)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)

Date

27.11.2005 18:04:22

0.003583304 = product of:
  0.01791652 = sum of:
    0.01791652 = weight(_text_:of in 210) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.01791652 = score(doc=210,freq=14.0), product of:
        0.06532493 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04177434 = queryNorm
        0.2742677 = fieldWeight in 210, product of:
          3.7416575 = tf(freq=14.0), with freq of:
            14.0 = termFreq=14.0
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=210)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)

Abstract

After modeling expert user needs with regard to intellectual property information, we analyze and compare the main providers in this specific information area (Thomson DIALOG, Esp@cenet by the European Patent Office, Questel-Orbit, and STN International) in terms of system content and system functionality. The key question is whether the main providers are able to satisfy these expert user needs. For patent information, some special retrieval features such as chemical structure search (including Markush search), patent family references and citations search, biosequence search, and basic informetric functionality such as ranking, mapping, and visualization of information flows are realized. Considering the results of information science research, the practice of patent information shows unexhausted improvement opportunities (e.g., the application of bibliographic patent coupling and co-patent-citation for mapping patents, patent assignees, and technology specialties). For trademark search, users need multiple truncated search (realized) as well as phonetic search and image retrieval (not realized yet).

Source

Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 57(2006) no.13, S.1794-1803

0.0035690558 = product of:
  0.017845279 = sum of:
    0.017845279 = weight(_text_:of in 2784) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.017845279 = score(doc=2784,freq=20.0), product of:
        0.06532493 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04177434 = queryNorm
        0.27317715 = fieldWeight in 2784, product of:
          4.472136 = tf(freq=20.0), with freq of:
            20.0 = termFreq=20.0
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2784)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)

Abstract

Dealing with information is one of the vital skills in the 21st century. It takes a fair degree of information savvy to create, represent and supply information as well as to search for and retrieve relevant knowledge. How does information (documents, pieces of knowledge) have to be organized in order to be retrievable? What role does metadata play? What are search engines on the Web, or in corporate intranets, and how do they work? How must one deal with natural language processing and tools of knowledge organization, such as thesauri, classification systems, and ontologies? How useful is social tagging? How valuable are intellectually created abstracts and automatically prepared extracts? Which empirical methods allow for user research and which for the evaluation of information systems? This Handbook is a basic work of information science, providing a comprehensive overview of the current state of information retrieval and knowledge representation. It addresses readers from all professions and scientific disciplines, but particularly scholars, practitioners and students of Information Science, Library Science, Computer Science, Information Management, and Knowledge Management. This Handbook is a suitable reference work for Public and Academic Libraries.

0.0025538085 = product of:
  0.0127690425 = sum of:
    0.0127690425 = weight(_text_:of in 3335) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0127690425 = score(doc=3335,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.06532493 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04177434 = queryNorm
        0.19546966 = fieldWeight in 3335, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=3335)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)

Abstract

Wir vergleichen die Content-Aggregatoren DataStar, DIALOG, DIMDI, FIZ Karlsruhe (STN International), FIZ Technik, Ovid, Questel-Orbit and Thomson Scientific's Web of Knowledge hinsichtlich ihrer Stellung auf dem Markt elektronischer Informationsdienste in Deutschland. Besprochen werden die Wettbewerbssituation sowie die Kooperationen, die Stärken bzw. Alleinstellungsmerkmale der Informationsanbieter und die kritischen Erfolgsfaktoren der WTMHosts. Marktführer ist in Deutschland eindeutig STN.

Object

Thomson Scientific's Web of Knowledge

0.0018058153 = product of:
  0.009029076 = sum of:
    0.009029076 = weight(_text_:of in 5496) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.009029076 = score(doc=5496,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.06532493 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04177434 = queryNorm
        0.13821793 = fieldWeight in 5496, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=5496)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)

Abstract

In Password 11/2000 wurden durch einen Retrievaltest die qualitativ führenden Suchwerkzeuge im Internet bestimmt. In den nächsten Teilen unseres State of the Art - Berichts über Retrievalsysteme im World Wide Weh beschreiben wir einzelne interessante Ansätze der Technik der TopSuchwerkzeuge. Den Anfang machen die klassifikatorischen Verzeichnisse Yahoo! und das Open Directory-Projekt sowie das System Oingo, das im Rahmen eines "semantischen Retrievals" das Homonym- und Synonymproblem angeht