Search (46 results, page 1 of 3)

  • × theme_ss:"Social tagging"
  1. Farkas, M.G.: Social software in libraries : building collaboration, communication, and community online (2007) 0.06 
    0.060086653 = product of:
  0.18025996 = sum of:
    0.14883982 = weight(_text_:bibliothek in 2364) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.14883982 = score(doc=2364,freq=24.0), product of:
        0.1578712 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.1055303 = idf(docFreq=1980, maxDocs=44218)
          0.038453303 = queryNorm
        0.94279265 = fieldWeight in 2364, product of:
          4.8989797 = tf(freq=24.0), with freq of:
            24.0 = termFreq=24.0
          4.1055303 = idf(docFreq=1980, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2364)
    0.031420145 = weight(_text_:internet in 2364) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.031420145 = score(doc=2364,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.11352337 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.9522398 = idf(docFreq=6276, maxDocs=44218)
          0.038453303 = queryNorm
        0.27677247 = fieldWeight in 2364, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          2.9522398 = idf(docFreq=6276, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2364)
  0.33333334 = coord(2/6)
    LCSH
    Libraries and the Internet
    RSWK
    Bibliothek / Soziale Software
    Bibliothek / Wiki
    Bibliothek / Web log
    Bibliothek / Podcasting
    Bibliothek / Virtuelle Gemeinschaft
    Soziale Software / Bibliothek
    Subject
    Bibliothek / Soziale Software
    Bibliothek / Wiki
    Bibliothek / Web log
    Bibliothek / Podcasting
    Bibliothek / Virtuelle Gemeinschaft
    Soziale Software / Bibliothek
    Libraries and the Internet
  2. Peters, I.: Folksonomies und kollaborative Informationsdienste : eine Alternative zur Websuche? (2011) 0.01 
    0.0145474505 = product of:
  0.04364235 = sum of:
    0.029623196 = weight(_text_:internet in 343) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.029623196 = score(doc=343,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.11352337 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.9522398 = idf(docFreq=6276, maxDocs=44218)
          0.038453303 = queryNorm
        0.2609436 = fieldWeight in 343, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          2.9522398 = idf(docFreq=6276, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=343)
    0.014019156 = product of:
      0.042057466 = sum of:
        0.042057466 = weight(_text_:29 in 343) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.042057466 = score(doc=343,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.13526669 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
              0.038453303 = queryNorm
            0.31092256 = fieldWeight in 343, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=343)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.33333334 = coord(2/6)
    Pages
    S.29-53
    Source
    Handbuch Internet-Suchmaschinen, 2: Neue Entwicklungen in der Web-Suche. Hrsg.: D. Lewandowski
  3. Regulski, K.: Aufwand und Nutzen beim Einsatz von Social-Bookmarking-Services als Nachweisinstrument für wissenschaftliche Forschungsartikel am Beispiel von BibSonomy (2007) 0.01 
    0.013503022 = product of:
  0.08101813 = sum of:
    0.08101813 = weight(_text_:bibliothek in 4595) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.08101813 = score(doc=4595,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.1578712 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.1055303 = idf(docFreq=1980, maxDocs=44218)
          0.038453303 = queryNorm
        0.5131913 = fieldWeight in 4595, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          4.1055303 = idf(docFreq=1980, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=4595)
  0.16666667 = coord(1/6)
    Abstract
    Autoren wissenschaftlicher Artikel stehen unterschiedliche Wege bei der Recherche nach Hintergrundmaterial zu ihren Projekten zur Verfügung. Dass Social-Bookmarking-Dienste, die als Teil des Web 2.0 (O'Reilly, 2005) und der Bibliothek 2.0 (Danowski, 2006) genannt werden, eine sinnvolle Ergänzung zu den herkömmlichen Nachweisdatenbanken sein können, soll der vorliegende Artikel zeigen.
    Source
    Bibliothek: Forschung und Praxis. 31(2007) H.2, S.177-184
  4. Müller-Prove, M.: Modell und Anwendungsperspektive des Social Tagging (2008) 0.01 
    0.009304067 = product of:
  0.0558244 = sum of:
    0.0558244 = product of:
      0.0837366 = sum of:
        0.042057466 = weight(_text_:29 in 2882) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.042057466 = score(doc=2882,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.13526669 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
              0.038453303 = queryNorm
            0.31092256 = fieldWeight in 2882, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=2882)
        0.041679136 = weight(_text_:22 in 2882) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.041679136 = score(doc=2882,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.13465692 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.038453303 = queryNorm
            0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 2882, 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=2882)
      0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
  0.16666667 = coord(1/6)
    Date
    21. 6.2009 9:55:29
    Pages
    S.15-22
  5. Niemann, C.: Tag-Science : Ein Analysemodell zur Nutzbarkeit von Tagging-Daten (2011) 0.01 
    0.008429782 = product of:
  0.05057869 = sum of:
    0.05057869 = product of:
      0.07586803 = sum of:
        0.044608682 = weight(_text_:29 in 164) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.044608682 = score(doc=164,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.13526669 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
              0.038453303 = queryNorm
            0.3297832 = fieldWeight in 164, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=164)
        0.03125935 = weight(_text_:22 in 164) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.03125935 = score(doc=164,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.13465692 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.038453303 = queryNorm
            0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 164, 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=164)
      0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
  0.16666667 = coord(1/6)
    Date
    29. 5.2012 13:58:08
    29. 5.2012 14:15:36
    Source
    ¬Die Kraft der digitalen Unordnung: 32. Arbeits- und Fortbildungstagung der ASpB e. V., Sektion 5 im Deutschen Bibliotheksverband, 22.-25. September 2009 in der Universität Karlsruhe. Hrsg: Jadwiga Warmbrunn u.a
  6. Chen, M.; Liu, X.; Qin, J.: Semantic relation extraction from socially-generated tags : a methodology for metadata generation (2008) 0.01 
    0.005815042 = product of:
  0.034890253 = sum of:
    0.034890253 = product of:
      0.052335378 = sum of:
        0.026285918 = weight(_text_:29 in 2648) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.026285918 = score(doc=2648,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.13526669 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
              0.038453303 = queryNorm
            0.19432661 = fieldWeight in 2648, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2648)
        0.02604946 = weight(_text_:22 in 2648) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.02604946 = score(doc=2648,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.13465692 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.038453303 = queryNorm
            0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 2648, 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=2648)
      0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
  0.16666667 = coord(1/6)
    Date
    20. 2.2009 10:29:07
    Source
    Metadata for semantic and social applications : proceedings of the International Conference on Dublin Core and Metadata Applications, Berlin, 22 - 26 September 2008, DC 2008: Berlin, Germany / ed. by Jane Greenberg and Wolfgang Klas
  7. Wang, J.; Clements, M.; Yang, J.; Vries, A.P. de; Reinders, M.J.T.: Personalization of tagging systems (2010) 0.01 
    0.005236691 = product of:
  0.031420145 = sum of:
    0.031420145 = weight(_text_:internet in 4229) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.031420145 = score(doc=4229,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.11352337 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.9522398 = idf(docFreq=6276, maxDocs=44218)
          0.038453303 = queryNorm
        0.27677247 = fieldWeight in 4229, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          2.9522398 = idf(docFreq=6276, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4229)
  0.16666667 = coord(1/6)
    Abstract
    Social media systems have encouraged end user participation in the Internet, for the purpose of storing and distributing Internet content, sharing opinions and maintaining relationships. Collaborative tagging allows users to annotate the resulting user-generated content, and enables effective retrieval of otherwise uncategorised data. However, compared to professional web content production, collaborative tagging systems face the challenge that end-users assign tags in an uncontrolled manner, resulting in unsystematic and inconsistent metadata. This paper introduces a framework for the personalization of social media systems. We pinpoint three tasks that would benefit from personalization: collaborative tagging, collaborative browsing and collaborative search. We propose a ranking model for each task that integrates the individual user's tagging history in the recommendation of tags and content, to align its suggestions to the individual user preferences. We demonstrate on two real data sets that for all three tasks, the personalized ranking should take into account both the user's own preference and the opinion of others.
  8. Munk, T.B.; Moerk, K.: Folksonomies, tagging communities, and tagging strategies : an empirical study (2007) 0.00 
    0.0043639094 = product of:
  0.026183454 = sum of:
    0.026183454 = weight(_text_:internet in 1091) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.026183454 = score(doc=1091,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.11352337 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.9522398 = idf(docFreq=6276, maxDocs=44218)
          0.038453303 = queryNorm
        0.23064373 = fieldWeight in 1091, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          2.9522398 = idf(docFreq=6276, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1091)
  0.16666667 = coord(1/6)
    Abstract
    The subject of this article is folksonomies on the Internet. One of the largest folksonomies on the Internet in terms of number of users and tagged websites is the computer program del.icio.us, where more than 100,000 people have tagged the websites that they and others find using their own keywords. How this is done in practice and the patterns to be found are the focus of this article. The empirical basis is the collection of 76,601 different keywords with a total frequency of 178,215 from 500 randomly chosen taggers on del.icio.us at the end of 2005. The keywords collected were then analyzed quantitatively statistically by uncovering their frequency and percentage distribution and through a statistical correspondence analysis in order to uncover possible patterns in the users' tags. Subsequently, a qualitative textual analysis of the tags was made in order to find out by analysis which tagging strategies are represented in the data material. This led to four conclusions. 1) the distribution of keywords follows classic power law; 2) distinct tagging communities are identifiable; 3) the most frequently used tags are situated on a general-specific axis; and 4) nine distinct tagging strategies are observed. These four conclusions are put into perspective collectively in respect of a number of more general and theoretical considerations concerning folksonomies and the classification systems of the future.
  9. Watters, C.; Nizam, N.: Knowledge organization on the Web : the emergent role of social classification (2012) 0.00 
    0.0043200497 = product of:
  0.025920296 = sum of:
    0.025920296 = weight(_text_:internet in 828) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.025920296 = score(doc=828,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.11352337 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.9522398 = idf(docFreq=6276, maxDocs=44218)
          0.038453303 = queryNorm
        0.22832564 = fieldWeight in 828, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          2.9522398 = idf(docFreq=6276, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=828)
  0.16666667 = coord(1/6)
    Abstract
    There are close to a billion websites on the Internet with approximately 400 million users worldwide [www.internetworldstats.com]. People go to websites for a wide variety of different information tasks, from finding a restaurant to serious research. Many of the difficulties with searching the Web, as it is structured currently, can be attributed to increases to scale. The content of the Web is now so large that we only have a rough estimate of the number of sites and the range of information is extremely diverse, from blogs and photos to research articles and news videos.
  10. Bundza, M.: ¬The choice is yours! : researchers assign subject metadata to their own materials in institutional repositories (2014) 0.00 
    0.0043200497 = product of:
  0.025920296 = sum of:
    0.025920296 = weight(_text_:internet in 1968) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.025920296 = score(doc=1968,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.11352337 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.9522398 = idf(docFreq=6276, maxDocs=44218)
          0.038453303 = queryNorm
        0.22832564 = fieldWeight in 1968, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          2.9522398 = idf(docFreq=6276, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=1968)
  0.16666667 = coord(1/6)
    Abstract
    The Digital Commons platform for institutional repositories provides a three-tiered taxonomy of academic disciplines for each item submitted to the repository. Since faculty and departmental administrators across campuses are encouraged to submit materials to the institutional repository themselves, they must also assign disciplines or subject categories for their own work. The expandable drop-down menu of about 1,000 categories is easy to use, and facilitates the growth of the institutional repository and access to the materials through the Internet.
  11. Rafferty, P.: Tagging (2018) 0.00 
    0.0043200497 = product of:
  0.025920296 = sum of:
    0.025920296 = weight(_text_:internet in 4647) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.025920296 = score(doc=4647,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.11352337 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.9522398 = idf(docFreq=6276, maxDocs=44218)
          0.038453303 = queryNorm
        0.22832564 = fieldWeight in 4647, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          2.9522398 = idf(docFreq=6276, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=4647)
  0.16666667 = coord(1/6)
    Abstract
    This article examines tagging as knowledge organization. Tagging is a kind of indexing, a process of labelling and categorizing information made to support resource discovery for users. Social tagging generally means the practice whereby internet users generate keywords to describe, categorise or comment on digital content. The value of tagging comes when social tags within a collection are aggregated and shared through a folksonomy. This article examines definitions of tagging and folksonomy, and discusses the functions, advantages and disadvantages of tagging systems in relation to knowledge organization before discussing studies that have compared tagging and conventional library-based knowledge organization systems. Approaches to disciplining tagging practice are examined and tagger motivation discussed. Finally, the article outlines current research fronts.
  12. Beuth, P.: ¬Ein Freund weckt Vertrauen : Experten sehen im Online-Portal Twitter ein neues Massenmedium heranwachsen (2008) 0.00 
    0.0037412727 = product of:
  0.022447636 = sum of:
    0.022447636 = weight(_text_:internet in 4273) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.022447636 = score(doc=4273,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.11352337 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.9522398 = idf(docFreq=6276, maxDocs=44218)
          0.038453303 = queryNorm
        0.19773582 = fieldWeight in 4273, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          2.9522398 = idf(docFreq=6276, maxDocs=44218)
          0.02734375 = fieldNorm(doc=4273)
  0.16666667 = coord(1/6)
    Content
    "Vinu schreibt: "Ich habe gerade eine weitere laute Explosion gehört. Das alles passiert nur zwei Gehminuten von meiner Wohnung entfernt." Netra schreibt: "Keine Panik. Nicht auf die Nachrichten hören. Die verbreiten Gerüchte und nehmen sie später zurück. Bleibt im Haus und bleibt ruhig." Vinu: "Die Schüsse kommen definitiv aus einer AK-47, und unsere Polizisten sind da draußen ohne schusssichere Westen und mit Scheiß-Gewehren." Sie waren näher dran als die meisten Journalisten - und sie berichteten unaufhörlich im Internet: Augenzeugen in Bombay nutzten beliebte Plattformen wie Twitter und Flickr, um aus erster Hand zu beschreiben, was in der indischen Metropole passierte. Auf der Seite Twitter.com schreiben User in 140 Zeichen, was sie gerade tun. Kaffee trinken, sich im Büro langweilen, eine Party suchen. Nun ist Twitter kurzzeitig zu einer Art Nachrichtenticker geworden: Über Filterbegriffe wie Bombay und Terror konnte jeder nachvollziehen, in welcher Lage sich die Menschen in der Stadt befanden, was sie von den Angriffen, Schießereien und Explosionen mitbekamen. Und wo sie bei Flickr.com ihre Bilder vom Geschehen hochgeladen haben. Das alles passierte beinahe in Echtzeit. Die Fotoplattform Flickr, sonst eher eine Sammelstelle für Urlaubsbilder und Material von ambitionierten Amateurfotografen, wurde zur Bilderstrecke über die Vorgänge in Bombay. Bewaffnete Terroristen, brennende Gebäude, verwüstete Hotellobbys und Blutlachen auf dem Boden - manche wagten sich gefährlich nahe an das Geschehen heran. Zumindest schien es so, denn ob die Bilder wirklich von denen gemacht wurden, die sie hochgeladen haben, war nicht immer klar. Manche dieser Bilder waren auch auf den Internetseiten von TV-Sendern zu sehen, und wer da von wem geklaut hat, ist schwer zu sagen. Auch im Wust der Twitter-Einträge, der sogenannten Tweets, ging unter, was authentisch ist, was einfach nur von anderen Medien abgeschrieben und hundertfach weitergetwittert wurde - und was schlicht und einfach unwahr ist. Blogger "Tom" (tomstechblog.com) aus der Umgebung von Los Angeles hat Botschaften entdeckt, nach denen auch das Marriott-Hotel in Bombay angegriffen wurde. Eine Falschmeldung. Für Menschen, deren Verwandte oder Freunde in dem Hotel wohnen, sei das extrem beängstigend, schreibt er.
    Die Spielzeuge des Web 2.0 werden in solchen Situationen trotzdem zu Nachrichtenkanälen, ungefiltert und schneller als etablierte Medien. Ihr Reiz ist gerade die Subjektivität, die Emotionalität und die Vernetzung von Tausenden Personen rund um den Erdball. Die reinen Fakten gibt es woanders. "Social Media" heißen solche Dienste schließlich. Trotzdem werden sie ernstgenommen. Nach Untersuchungen der Harvard-Soziologin Shoshana Zuboff glauben die Menschen heutzutage in erster Linie ihren Freunden, während das Vertrauen in Unternehmen und Institutionen abnimmt. Übertragen auf das Internet bedeutet das: Wenn Informationen von Freunden aus der jeweiligen Online-Community stammen, vertraut man ihnen schneller, als wenn sie von einem unbekannten Redakteur irgendeiner Zeitung verbreitet werden. Im Fall Bombay zeigten die Reaktionen vieler sogenannter "Follower", also Leser von Twitter-Einträgen einer Person: Hier wird nicht viel hinterfragt. Hier wird kopiert und weitergeschickt, an die eigenen Follower. Für manche markiert der 24-stündige Sturm von 140-Zeichen-Meldungen nicht weniger als eine "epochale Veränderung des Nachrichtenflusses". So diktierte es etwa der New Yorker Journalismus-Professor Jeff Jarvis dem Handelsblatt-Blogger Thomas Knüwer. Der legt sich, wie auch der prominenteste TechBlogger der USA, Michael Arrington von TechCrunch, fest: "Der heutige Tag wird ein Durchbruch werden auf dem Weg Twitters zum Massenmedium.""
    Theme
    Internet
  13. Schillerwein, S.: ¬Der 'Business Case' für die Nutzung von Social Tagging in Intranets und internen Informationssystemen (2008) 0.00 
    0.0037028994 = product of:
  0.022217397 = sum of:
    0.022217397 = weight(_text_:internet in 2893) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.022217397 = score(doc=2893,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.11352337 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.9522398 = idf(docFreq=6276, maxDocs=44218)
          0.038453303 = queryNorm
        0.1957077 = fieldWeight in 2893, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          2.9522398 = idf(docFreq=6276, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2893)
  0.16666667 = coord(1/6)
    Abstract
    Trendthemen, wie Social Tagging oder Web 2.0, bergen generell die Gefahr, dass Adaptionsentscheidungen auf Basis von im öffentlichen Internet vorgefundenen und den Medien lautstark thematisierten Erfolgsbeispielen getroffen werden. Für die interne Anwendung in einer Organisation ist dieses Vorgehen jedoch risikoreich. Deshalb sollte ein ausführlicher Business Case am Anfang jedes SocialTagging-Projekts stehen, der Nutzen- und Risikopotenziale realistisch einzuschätzen vermag. Der vorliegende Beitrag listet dazu exemplarisch die wichtigsten Aspekte für die Einschätzung des Wertbeitrags und der Stolpersteine für Social Tagging in Intranets und vergleichbaren internen Informationssystemen wie Mitarbeiterportalen, Dokumenten-Repositories und Knowledge Bases auf.
  14. Antin, J.; Earp, M.: With a little help from my friends : self-interested and prosocial behavior on MySpace Music (2010) 0.00 
    0.0037028994 = product of:
  0.022217397 = sum of:
    0.022217397 = weight(_text_:internet in 3458) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.022217397 = score(doc=3458,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.11352337 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.9522398 = idf(docFreq=6276, maxDocs=44218)
          0.038453303 = queryNorm
        0.1957077 = fieldWeight in 3458, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          2.9522398 = idf(docFreq=6276, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=3458)
  0.16666667 = coord(1/6)
    Theme
    Internet
  15. Vaidya, P.; Harinarayana, N.S.: ¬The comparative and analytical study of LibraryThing tags with Library of Congress Subject Headings (2016) 0.00 
    0.0037028994 = product of:
  0.022217397 = sum of:
    0.022217397 = weight(_text_:internet in 2492) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.022217397 = score(doc=2492,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.11352337 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.9522398 = idf(docFreq=6276, maxDocs=44218)
          0.038453303 = queryNorm
        0.1957077 = fieldWeight in 2492, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          2.9522398 = idf(docFreq=6276, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2492)
  0.16666667 = coord(1/6)
    Abstract
    The internet in its Web 2.0 version has given an opportunity among users to be participative and the chance to enhance the existing system, which makes it dynamic and collaborative. The activity of social tagging among researchers to organize the digital resources is an interesting study among information professionals. The one way of organizing the resources for future retrieval through these user-generated terms makes an interesting analysis by comparing them with professionally created controlled vocabularies. Here in this study, an attempt has been made to compare Library of Congress Subject Headings (LCSH) terms with LibraryThing social tags. In this comparative analysis, the results show that social tags can be used to enhance the metadata for information retrieval. But still, the uncontrolled nature of social tags is a concern and creates uncertainty among researchers.
  16. Komus, A.; Wauch, F.: Wikimanagement : was Unternehmen von Social-Software und Web 2.0 lernen können (2008) 0.00 
    0.0034911274 = product of:
  0.020946763 = sum of:
    0.020946763 = weight(_text_:internet in 508) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.020946763 = score(doc=508,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.11352337 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.9522398 = idf(docFreq=6276, maxDocs=44218)
          0.038453303 = queryNorm
        0.18451498 = fieldWeight in 508, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          2.9522398 = idf(docFreq=6276, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=508)
  0.16666667 = coord(1/6)
    Abstract
    Wie schaffen es hunderttausende Menschen in ihrer Freizeit eine Enzyklopädie zu erstellen, die in der Qualität der seit Jahrhunderten renommierten Brockhaus-Enzyklopädie in nichts nachsteht und in der Quantität weit übertrifft? Warum veröffentlichen Millionen von Internetnutzern ihre Urlaubsbilder und Videos aus dem privaten Leben im Netz? Wieso funktioniert die Informationsversorgung durch Touristen und Privatleute oftmals besser als die Berichterstattung der großen Agenturen? Und warum versprechen sich Unternehmen wie Google oder die Holtzbrinck Gruppe so viel von derartigen Plattformen, dass deren Gründer über Nacht zu Millionären werden? Wie schaffte es eine australische Brauerei, vom Business Plan bis zur Produktionsplanung alle Prozesse von einer Internet-Community entwickeln zu lassen? Wie passt die lose Kollaboration im Netz zu mühsam ausgearbeiteten und über viele Jahrzehnte untersuchten Organisationsmodellen in Unternehmen? Was können Unternehmen von Wikipedia & Co lernen? Wikimanagement gibt nicht nur einen ausführlichen Überblick über die aktuelle Welt des Web 2.0, sondern stellt auch die Funktionsweise der Wikipedia und anderer Social Software-Systeme den wichtigsten organisationstheoretischen Ansätzen gegenüber. In Anwendungsfeldern wie Innovation, Projektmanagement, Marketing und vielen anderen wird deutlich gemacht, wie Unternehmen von Social Software-Technologie und -Philosophie lernen und profitieren können.
    Theme
    Internet
  17. Shirky, C.: Ontology is overrated : categories, links, and tags (2005) 0.00 
    0.00308575 = product of:
  0.018514499 = sum of:
    0.018514499 = weight(_text_:internet in 1265) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.018514499 = score(doc=1265,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.11352337 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.9522398 = idf(docFreq=6276, maxDocs=44218)
          0.038453303 = queryNorm
        0.16308975 = fieldWeight in 1265, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          2.9522398 = idf(docFreq=6276, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1265)
  0.16666667 = coord(1/6)
    Series
    Clay Shirky's writings about the Internet
  18. Heckner, M.: Tagging, rating, posting : studying forms of user contribution for web-based information management and information retrieval (2009) 0.00 
    0.00308575 = product of:
  0.018514499 = sum of:
    0.018514499 = weight(_text_:internet in 2931) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.018514499 = score(doc=2931,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.11352337 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.9522398 = idf(docFreq=6276, maxDocs=44218)
          0.038453303 = queryNorm
        0.16308975 = fieldWeight in 2931, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          2.9522398 = idf(docFreq=6276, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2931)
  0.16666667 = coord(1/6)
    Theme
    Internet
  19. Nov, O.; Naaman, M.; Ye, C.: Analysis of participation in an online photo-sharing community : a multidimensional perspective (2010) 0.00 
    0.00308575 = product of:
  0.018514499 = sum of:
    0.018514499 = weight(_text_:internet in 3424) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.018514499 = score(doc=3424,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.11352337 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.9522398 = idf(docFreq=6276, maxDocs=44218)
          0.038453303 = queryNorm
        0.16308975 = fieldWeight in 3424, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          2.9522398 = idf(docFreq=6276, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3424)
  0.16666667 = coord(1/6)
    Theme
    Internet
  20. Huang, C.; Fu, T.; Chen, H.: Text-based video content classification for online video-sharing sites (2010) 0.00 
    0.00308575 = product of:
  0.018514499 = sum of:
    0.018514499 = weight(_text_:internet in 3452) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.018514499 = score(doc=3452,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.11352337 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.9522398 = idf(docFreq=6276, maxDocs=44218)
          0.038453303 = queryNorm
        0.16308975 = fieldWeight in 3452, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          2.9522398 = idf(docFreq=6276, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3452)
  0.16666667 = coord(1/6)
    Theme
    Internet

Authors

Years

Languages

  • e 35
  • d 10
  • i 1
  • More… Less…

Types

  • a 38
  • el 4
  • m 4
  • b 2
  • s 1
  • More… Less…

Themes

Subjects

Classifications