Search (22 results, page 1 of 2)

  • × theme_ss:"Social tagging"
  1. Choi, Y.; Syn, S.Y.: Characteristics of tagging behavior in digitized humanities online collections (2016) 0.02 
    0.022969227 = product of:
  0.08039229 = sum of:
    0.067735024 = weight(_text_:interpretation in 2891) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.067735024 = score(doc=2891,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.21405315 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.7281795 = idf(docFreq=390, maxDocs=44218)
          0.037368443 = queryNorm
        0.3164402 = fieldWeight in 2891, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          5.7281795 = idf(docFreq=390, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2891)
    0.01265727 = product of:
      0.02531454 = sum of:
        0.02531454 = weight(_text_:22 in 2891) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.02531454 = score(doc=2891,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.13085791 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.037368443 = queryNorm
            0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 2891, 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=2891)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.2857143 = coord(2/7)
    Abstract
    The purpose of this study was to examine user tags that describe digitized archival collections in the field of humanities. A collection of 8,310 tags from a digital portal (Nineteenth-Century Electronic Scholarship, NINES) was analyzed to find out what attributes of primary historical resources users described with tags. Tags were categorized to identify which tags describe the content of the resource, the resource itself, and subjective aspects (e.g., usage or emotion). The study's findings revealed that over half were content-related; tags representing opinion, usage context, or self-reference, however, reflected only a small percentage. The study further found that terms related to genre or physical format of a resource were frequently used in describing primary archival resources. It was also learned that nontextual resources had lower numbers of content-related tags and higher numbers of document-related tags than textual resources and bibliographic materials; moreover, textual resources tended to have more user-context-related tags than other resources. These findings help explain users' tagging behavior and resource interpretation in primary resources in the humanities. Such information provided through tags helps information professionals decide to what extent indexing archival and cultural resources should be done for resource description and discovery, and understand users' terminology.
    Date
    21. 4.2016 11:23:22
  2. Tennis, J.T.: Measured time : imposing a temporal metric to classificatory structures 0.01 
    0.013547006 = product of:
  0.09482904 = sum of:
    0.09482904 = weight(_text_:interpretation in 3529) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.09482904 = score(doc=3529,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.21405315 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.7281795 = idf(docFreq=390, maxDocs=44218)
          0.037368443 = queryNorm
        0.4430163 = fieldWeight in 3529, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          5.7281795 = idf(docFreq=390, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=3529)
  0.14285715 = coord(1/7)
    Abstract
    Describes three units of time helpful for understanding and evaluating classificatory structures: long time (versions and states of classification schemes), short time (the act of indexing as repeated ritual or form), and micro-time (where stages of the interpretation process of indexing are separated out and inventoried). Concludes with a short discussion of how time and the impermanence of classification also conjures up an artistic conceptualization of indexing, and briefly uses that to question the seemingly dominant understanding of classification practice as outcome of scientific management and assembly line thought.
  3. Panke, S.; Gaiser, B.: "With my head up in the clouds" : Social Tagging aus Nutzersicht (2008) 0.01 
    0.01161172 = product of:
  0.081282035 = sum of:
    0.081282035 = weight(_text_:interpretation in 2883) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.081282035 = score(doc=2883,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.21405315 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.7281795 = idf(docFreq=390, maxDocs=44218)
          0.037368443 = queryNorm
        0.37972826 = fieldWeight in 2883, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          5.7281795 = idf(docFreq=390, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2883)
  0.14285715 = coord(1/7)
    Abstract
    28 Prozent der amerikanischen Internetnutzer/innen haben es bereits getan: Das freie Verschlagworten von Inhalten aller Art per Social Tagging gehört zu den Anwendungen aus dem Kontext von Web 2.0, die sich zunehmender Beliebtheit erfreuen (Rainie, 2007). Während sich die bisherige Forschung überwiegend inhaltsanalytisch mit dem Phänomen befasst, kommen im vorliegenden Beitrag so genannte "Power User" zu Wort. Um zu einer fundierteren Interpretation der in den Inhaltsanalysen gewonnenen Erkenntnisse beizutragen, wurden Interviews mit Personen durchgeführt, die mehrere Tagging Systeme parallel einsetzen, sich auch mit den technischen Grundlagen auskennen und als "Early Adopter" bereits seit geraumer Zeit aktiv sind. Entsprechend leitet der Beitrag von einer Synopse der aktuellen Literatur in die beschriebene Studie über und schließt mit einem Ausblick auf zukünftige Forschungsvorhaben im Kontext von Social Tagging.
  4. Trant, J.; Bearman, D.: Social terminology enhancement through vernacular engagement : exploring collaborative annotation to encourage interaction with museum collections (2005) 0.01 
    0.0077411463 = product of:
  0.05418802 = sum of:
    0.05418802 = weight(_text_:interpretation in 1185) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.05418802 = score(doc=1185,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.21405315 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.7281795 = idf(docFreq=390, maxDocs=44218)
          0.037368443 = queryNorm
        0.25315216 = fieldWeight in 1185, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          5.7281795 = idf(docFreq=390, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=1185)
  0.14285715 = coord(1/7)
    Abstract
    From their earliest encounters with the Web, museums have seen an opportunity to move beyond uni-directional communication into an environment that engages their users and reflects a multiplicity of perspectives. Shedding the "Unassailable Voice" (Walsh 1997) in favor of many "Points of View" (Sledge 1995) has challenged traditional museum approaches to the creation and delivery of content. Novel approaches are required in order to develop and sustain user engagement (Durbin 2004). New models of exhibit creation that democratize the curatorial functions of object selection and interpretation offer one way of opening up the museum (Coldicutt and Streten 2005). Another is to use the museum as a forum and focus for community story-telling (Howard, Pratty et al. 2005). Unfortunately, museum collections remain relatively inaccessible even when 'made available' through searchable on-line databases. Museum documentation seldom satisfies the on-line access needs of the broad public, both because it is written using professional terminology and because it may not address what is important to - or remembered by - the museum visitor. For example, an exhibition now on-line at The Metropolitan Museum of Art acknowledges "Coco" Chanel only in the brief, textual introduction (The Metropolitan Museum of Art 2005a). All of the images of her delightful fashion designs are attributed to "Gabrielle Chanel" (The Metropolitan Museum of Art 2005a). Interfaces that organize collections along axes of time or place - such of that of the Timeline of Art History (The Metropolitan Museum of Art 2005e) - often fail to match users' world-views, despite the care that went into their structuring or their significant pedagogical utility. Critically, as professionals working with art museums we realize that when cataloguers and curators describe works of art, they usually do not include the "subject" of the image itself. Simply put, we rarely answer the question "What is it a picture of?" Unfortunately, visitors will often remember a work based on its visual characteristics, only to find that Web-based searches for any of the things they recall do not produce results.
  5. Schillerwein, S.: ¬Der 'Business Case' für die Nutzung von Social Tagging in Intranets und internen Informationssystemen (2008) 0.00 
    0.0041475273 = product of:
  0.029032689 = sum of:
    0.029032689 = product of:
      0.058065377 = sum of:
        0.058065377 = weight(_text_:anwendung in 2893) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.058065377 = score(doc=2893,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.1809185 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.8414783 = idf(docFreq=948, maxDocs=44218)
              0.037368443 = queryNorm
            0.3209477 = fieldWeight in 2893, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              4.8414783 = idf(docFreq=948, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2893)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.14285715 = coord(1/7)
    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.
  6. Niemann, C.: Intelligenz im Chaos : erste Schritte zur Analyse des Kreativen Potenzials eines Tagging-Systems (2010) 0.00 
    0.0034562727 = product of:
  0.024193907 = sum of:
    0.024193907 = product of:
      0.048387814 = sum of:
        0.048387814 = weight(_text_:anwendung in 4375) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.048387814 = score(doc=4375,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.1809185 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.8414783 = idf(docFreq=948, maxDocs=44218)
              0.037368443 = queryNorm
            0.2674564 = fieldWeight in 4375, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              4.8414783 = idf(docFreq=948, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4375)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.14285715 = coord(1/7)
    Abstract
    Die Auszeichnung digitaler Medien durch Tagging ist zur festen Größe für das Wissensmanagement im Internet avanciert. Im Kontext des zunehmenden information overload' stehen wissenschaftliche Bibliotheken vor der Aufgabe, die große Flut digital publizierter Artikel und Werke möglichst inhaltlich erschlossen verfügbar zu machen. Die Frage ist, ob durch den Einsatz von Tagging-Systemen die kollaborative Intelligenz der NutzerInnen für die Sacherschließung eingesetzt werden kann, während diese von einer intuitiven und individuellen Wissensorganisation profitieren. Die große Freiheit bei der Vergabe von Deskriptoren durch die NutzerInnen eines Tagging-Systems ist nämlich ein ambivalentes Phänomen: Kundennähe und kreatives Potenzial stehen der großen Menge völlig unkontrollierter Meta-Informationen gegenüber, deren inhaltliche Qualität und Aussagekraft noch unklar ist. Bisherige Forschungsbemühungen konzentrieren sich hauptsächlich auf die automatische Hierarchisierung bzw. Relationierung der Tag-Daten (etwa mittels Ähnlichkeitsalgorithmen) oder auf die Analyse des (Miss-)Erfolgs, den die NutzerInnen bei einer Suchanfrage subjektiv erfahren. Aus der Sicht stark strukturierter Wissensorganisation, wie sie Experten z. B. durch die Anwendung von Klassifikationen realisieren, handelt es sich bei den zunächst unvermittelt nebeneinander stehenden Tags allerdings kurz gesagt um Chaos. Dass in diesem Chaos aber auch Struktur und wertvolles Wissen als Gemeinschaftsprodukt erzeugt werden kann, ist eine der zentralen Thesen dieses Artikels.
  7. Müller-Prove, M.: Modell und Anwendungsperspektive des Social Tagging (2008) 0.00 
    0.0028930905 = product of:
  0.020251632 = sum of:
    0.020251632 = product of:
      0.040503263 = sum of:
        0.040503263 = weight(_text_:22 in 2882) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.040503263 = score(doc=2882,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.13085791 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.037368443 = 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)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.14285715 = coord(1/7)
    Pages
    S.15-22
  8. Yoon, J.W.: Towards a user-oriented thesaurus for non-domain-specific image collections (2009) 0.00 
    0.002765018 = product of:
  0.019355126 = sum of:
    0.019355126 = product of:
      0.03871025 = sum of:
        0.03871025 = weight(_text_:anwendung in 4221) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.03871025 = score(doc=4221,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.1809185 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.8414783 = idf(docFreq=948, maxDocs=44218)
              0.037368443 = queryNorm
            0.21396513 = fieldWeight in 4221, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              4.8414783 = idf(docFreq=948, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=4221)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.14285715 = coord(1/7)
    Theme
    Konzeption und Anwendung des Prinzips Thesaurus
  9. Catarino, M.E.; Baptista, A.A.: Relating folksonomies with Dublin Core (2008) 0.00 
    0.0025571547 = product of:
  0.017900083 = sum of:
    0.017900083 = product of:
      0.035800166 = sum of:
        0.035800166 = weight(_text_:22 in 2652) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.035800166 = score(doc=2652,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.13085791 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.037368443 = queryNorm
            0.27358043 = fieldWeight in 2652, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2652)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.14285715 = coord(1/7)
    Pages
    S.14-22
    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
  10. Harrer, A.; Lohmann, S.: Potenziale von Tagging als partizipative Methode für Lehrportale und E-Learning-Kurse (2008) 0.00 
    0.002531454 = product of:
  0.017720178 = sum of:
    0.017720178 = product of:
      0.035440356 = sum of:
        0.035440356 = weight(_text_:22 in 2889) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.035440356 = score(doc=2889,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.13085791 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.037368443 = queryNorm
            0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 2889, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=2889)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.14285715 = coord(1/7)
    Date
    21. 6.2009 12:22:44
  11. Kruk, S.R.; Kruk, E.; Stankiewicz, K.: Evaluation of semantic and social technologies for digital libraries (2009) 0.00 
    0.0021698177 = product of:
  0.015188723 = sum of:
    0.015188723 = product of:
      0.030377446 = sum of:
        0.030377446 = weight(_text_:22 in 3387) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.030377446 = score(doc=3387,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.13085791 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.037368443 = queryNorm
            0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 3387, 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=3387)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.14285715 = coord(1/7)
    Date
    1. 8.2010 12:35:22
  12. Rolla, P.J.: User tags versus Subject headings : can user-supplied data improve subject access to library collections? (2009) 0.00 
    0.0021698177 = product of:
  0.015188723 = sum of:
    0.015188723 = product of:
      0.030377446 = sum of:
        0.030377446 = weight(_text_:22 in 3601) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.030377446 = score(doc=3601,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.13085791 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.037368443 = queryNorm
            0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 3601, 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=3601)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.14285715 = coord(1/7)
    Date
    10. 9.2000 17:38:22
  13. Strader, C.R.: Author-assigned keywords versus Library of Congress Subject Headings : implications for the cataloging of electronic theses and dissertations (2009) 0.00 
    0.0021698177 = product of:
  0.015188723 = sum of:
    0.015188723 = product of:
      0.030377446 = sum of:
        0.030377446 = weight(_text_:22 in 3602) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.030377446 = score(doc=3602,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.13085791 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.037368443 = queryNorm
            0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 3602, 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=3602)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.14285715 = coord(1/7)
    Date
    10. 9.2000 17:38:22
  14. Niemann, C.: Tag-Science : Ein Analysemodell zur Nutzbarkeit von Tagging-Daten (2011) 0.00 
    0.0021698177 = product of:
  0.015188723 = sum of:
    0.015188723 = product of:
      0.030377446 = sum of:
        0.030377446 = weight(_text_:22 in 164) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.030377446 = score(doc=164,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.13085791 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.037368443 = 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)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.14285715 = coord(1/7)
    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
  15. Danowski, P.: Authority files and Web 2.0 : Wikipedia and the PND. An Example (2007) 0.00 
    0.0018081815 = product of:
  0.01265727 = sum of:
    0.01265727 = product of:
      0.02531454 = sum of:
        0.02531454 = weight(_text_:22 in 1291) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.02531454 = score(doc=1291,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.13085791 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.037368443 = queryNorm
            0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 1291, 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=1291)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.14285715 = coord(1/7)
    Content
    Vortrag anlässlich des Workshops: "Extending the multilingual capacity of The European Library in the EDL project Stockholm, Swedish National Library, 22-23 November 2007".
  16. Chen, M.; Liu, X.; Qin, J.: Semantic relation extraction from socially-generated tags : a methodology for metadata generation (2008) 0.00 
    0.0018081815 = product of:
  0.01265727 = sum of:
    0.01265727 = product of:
      0.02531454 = sum of:
        0.02531454 = weight(_text_:22 in 2648) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.02531454 = score(doc=2648,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.13085791 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.037368443 = 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)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.14285715 = coord(1/7)
    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
  17. Kim, H.L.; Scerri, S.; Breslin, J.G.; Decker, S.; Kim, H.G.: ¬The state of the art in tag ontologies : a semantic model for tagging and folksonomies (2008) 0.00 
    0.0018081815 = product of:
  0.01265727 = sum of:
    0.01265727 = product of:
      0.02531454 = sum of:
        0.02531454 = weight(_text_:22 in 2650) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.02531454 = score(doc=2650,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.13085791 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.037368443 = queryNorm
            0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 2650, 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=2650)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.14285715 = coord(1/7)
    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
  18. Yi, K.: Harnessing collective intelligence in social tagging using Delicious (2012) 0.00 
    0.0018081815 = product of:
  0.01265727 = sum of:
    0.01265727 = product of:
      0.02531454 = sum of:
        0.02531454 = weight(_text_:22 in 515) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.02531454 = score(doc=515,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.13085791 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.037368443 = queryNorm
            0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 515, 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=515)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.14285715 = coord(1/7)
    Date
    25.12.2012 15:22:37
  19. Qin, C.; Liu, Y.; Mou, J.; Chen, J.: User adoption of a hybrid social tagging approach in an online knowledge community (2019) 0.00 
    0.0018081815 = product of:
  0.01265727 = sum of:
    0.01265727 = product of:
      0.02531454 = sum of:
        0.02531454 = weight(_text_:22 in 5492) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.02531454 = score(doc=5492,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.13085791 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.037368443 = queryNorm
            0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 5492, 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=5492)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.14285715 = coord(1/7)
    Date
    20. 1.2015 18:30:22
  20. Bentley, C.M.; Labelle, P.R.: ¬A comparison of social tagging designs and user participation (2008) 0.00 
    0.0014465452 = product of:
  0.010125816 = sum of:
    0.010125816 = product of:
      0.020251632 = sum of:
        0.020251632 = weight(_text_:22 in 2657) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.020251632 = score(doc=2657,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.13085791 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.037368443 = queryNorm
            0.15476047 = fieldWeight in 2657, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=2657)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.14285715 = coord(1/7)
    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

Authors

Years

Languages

  • e 16
  • d 6

Types

Themes