Search (739 results, page 1 of 37)

  • × year_i:[2010 TO 2020}
  • × type_ss:"a"
  1. Suchenwirth, L.: Sacherschliessung in Zeiten von Corona : neue Herausforderungen und Chancen (2019) 0.47 
    0.4655805 = product of:
  0.8147658 = sum of:
    0.059350993 = product of:
      0.17805298 = sum of:
        0.17805298 = weight(_text_:3a in 484) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.17805298 = score(doc=484,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.31681007 = queryWeight, product of:
              8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
              0.037368443 = queryNorm
            0.56201804 = fieldWeight in 484, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=484)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    0.25180492 = weight(_text_:2f in 484) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.25180492 = score(doc=484,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.31681007 = queryWeight, product of:
          8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
          0.037368443 = queryNorm
        0.7948135 = fieldWeight in 484, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=484)
    0.25180492 = weight(_text_:2f in 484) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.25180492 = score(doc=484,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.31681007 = queryWeight, product of:
          8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
          0.037368443 = queryNorm
        0.7948135 = fieldWeight in 484, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=484)
    0.25180492 = weight(_text_:2f in 484) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.25180492 = score(doc=484,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.31681007 = queryWeight, product of:
          8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
          0.037368443 = queryNorm
        0.7948135 = fieldWeight in 484, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=484)
  0.5714286 = coord(4/7)
    Footnote
    https%3A%2F%2Fjournals.univie.ac.at%2Findex.php%2Fvoebm%2Farticle%2Fdownload%2F5332%2F5271%2F&usg=AOvVaw2yQdFGHlmOwVls7ANCpTii.
  2. Zeng, Q.; Yu, M.; Yu, W.; Xiong, J.; Shi, Y.; Jiang, M.: Faceted hierarchy : a new graph type to organize scientific concepts and a construction method (2019) 0.34 
    0.33914855 = product of:
  0.5935099 = sum of:
    0.059350993 = product of:
      0.17805298 = sum of:
        0.17805298 = weight(_text_:3a in 400) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.17805298 = score(doc=400,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.31681007 = queryWeight, product of:
              8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
              0.037368443 = queryNorm
            0.56201804 = fieldWeight in 400, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=400)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    0.17805298 = weight(_text_:2f in 400) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.17805298 = score(doc=400,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.31681007 = queryWeight, product of:
          8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
          0.037368443 = queryNorm
        0.56201804 = fieldWeight in 400, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=400)
    0.17805298 = weight(_text_:2f in 400) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.17805298 = score(doc=400,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.31681007 = queryWeight, product of:
          8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
          0.037368443 = queryNorm
        0.56201804 = fieldWeight in 400, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=400)
    0.17805298 = weight(_text_:2f in 400) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.17805298 = score(doc=400,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.31681007 = queryWeight, product of:
          8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
          0.037368443 = queryNorm
        0.56201804 = fieldWeight in 400, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=400)
  0.5714286 = coord(4/7)
    Content
    Vgl.: https%3A%2F%2Faclanthology.org%2FD19-5317.pdf&usg=AOvVaw0ZZFyq5wWTtNTvNkrvjlGA.
  3. Herb, U.; Beucke, D.: ¬Die Zukunft der Impact-Messung : Social Media, Nutzung und Zitate im World Wide Web (2013) 0.31 
    0.3052337 = product of:
  0.7122119 = sum of:
    0.23740397 = weight(_text_:2f in 2188) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.23740397 = score(doc=2188,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.31681007 = queryWeight, product of:
          8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
          0.037368443 = queryNorm
        0.7493574 = fieldWeight in 2188, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=2188)
    0.23740397 = weight(_text_:2f in 2188) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.23740397 = score(doc=2188,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.31681007 = queryWeight, product of:
          8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
          0.037368443 = queryNorm
        0.7493574 = fieldWeight in 2188, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=2188)
    0.23740397 = weight(_text_:2f in 2188) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.23740397 = score(doc=2188,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.31681007 = queryWeight, product of:
          8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
          0.037368443 = queryNorm
        0.7493574 = fieldWeight in 2188, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=2188)
  0.42857143 = coord(3/7)
    Content
    Vgl. unter: https://www.leibniz-science20.de%2Fforschung%2Fprojekte%2Faltmetrics-in-verschiedenen-wissenschaftsdisziplinen%2F&ei=2jTgVaaXGcK4Udj1qdgB&usg=AFQjCNFOPdONj4RKBDf9YDJOLuz3lkGYlg&sig2=5YI3KWIGxBmk5_kv0P_8iQ.
  4. Chen, S.-J.; Lee, H.-L.: Art images and mental associations : a preliminary exploration (2014) 0.03 
    0.027563075 = product of:
  0.09647076 = sum of:
    0.081282035 = weight(_text_:interpretation in 1416) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.081282035 = score(doc=1416,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.21405315 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.7281795 = idf(docFreq=390, maxDocs=44218)
          0.037368443 = queryNorm
        0.37972826 = fieldWeight in 1416, 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=1416)
    0.015188723 = product of:
      0.030377446 = sum of:
        0.030377446 = weight(_text_:22 in 1416) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.030377446 = score(doc=1416,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.13085791 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.037368443 = queryNorm
            0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 1416, 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=1416)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.2857143 = coord(2/7)
    Abstract
    This paper reports on the preliminary findings of a study that explores mental associations made by novices viewing art images. In a controlled environment, 20 Taiwanese college students responded to the question "What does the painting remind you of?" after viewing each digitized image of 15 oil paintings by a famous Taiwanese artist. Rather than focusing on the representation or interpretation of art, the study attempted to solicit information about how non-experts are stimulated by art. This paper reports on the analysis of participant responses to three of the images, and describes a12-type taxonomy of association emerged from the analysis. While 9 of the types are derived and adapted from facets in the Art & Architecture Thesaurus, three new types - Artistic Influence Association, Reactive Association, and Prototype Association - are discovered. The conclusion briefly discusses both the significance of the findings and the implications for future research.
    Source
    Knowledge organization in the 21st century: between historical patterns and future prospects. Proceedings of the Thirteenth International ISKO Conference 19-22 May 2014, Kraków, Poland. Ed.: Wieslaw Babik
  5. Mensing, P.: Planung und Durchführung von Digitalisierungsprojekten am Beispiel nicht-textueller Materialien (2010) 0.02 
    0.02399714 = product of:
  0.083989985 = sum of:
    0.06705425 = weight(_text_:interpretation in 3577) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.06705425 = score(doc=3577,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.21405315 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.7281795 = idf(docFreq=390, maxDocs=44218)
          0.037368443 = queryNorm
        0.3132598 = fieldWeight in 3577, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          5.7281795 = idf(docFreq=390, maxDocs=44218)
          0.02734375 = fieldNorm(doc=3577)
    0.016935734 = product of:
      0.03387147 = sum of:
        0.03387147 = weight(_text_:anwendung in 3577) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.03387147 = score(doc=3577,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.1809185 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.8414783 = idf(docFreq=948, maxDocs=44218)
              0.037368443 = queryNorm
            0.18721949 = fieldWeight in 3577, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              4.8414783 = idf(docFreq=948, maxDocs=44218)
              0.02734375 = fieldNorm(doc=3577)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.2857143 = coord(2/7)
    Content
    Darin auch: "2.7 Erschließung der Digitalisate Die formale Erschließung von gedruckten Beständen wird in Deutschland nach RAK-WB bzw. RAK-OB durchgeführt. Im Gegensatz zu Druckwerken, die meist alle wichtigen Informationen selbst enthalten (Impressum), sind in oder an Kunstwerken und Bildern meist keine Angaben wie Autor, Künstler oder Entstehungsjahr zu finden. Für die Formalerfassung von Nichtbuchmaterialien sind in Deutschland die "Regeln für die alphabetische Katalogisierung von Nichtbuchmaterialien" anzuwenden (RAK-NBM), eine Erweiterung der o.g. RAK. Zur Erschließung von Kunstwerken wurde seit den 70er Jahren des 20. Jhds. die Marburger-Index-Datenbank (MIDAS) entwickelt, die auf dem AKL, ICONCLASS und auch RAK aufbaut. MIDAS findet hauptsächlich in Museen Anwendung, konnte sich aber aufgrund der nicht verbindlichen Nutzung nicht durchsetzen. Ebenfalls aus dem Museumsbereich stammt CIDOC CRM, das seit 2006 ISO-zertifiziert ist (ISO 21127:2006) und der Datenfeldkatalog zur Grundinventarisation. Um die inhaltliche Erschließung von Bibliotheksbeständen einheitlich gestalten zu können, wurde die Schlagwortnormdatei entwickelt. Diese Datei ist universell ausgerichtet und ist daher für Spezialgebiete nicht tief genug ausgearbeitet. Im kunsthistorischen Bereich sind daher außerdem u.a. der AA und der AGM von Bedeutung. Als Klassifizierungssystem steht ICONCLASS zur Verfügung. Bei der inhaltlichen Erschließung ist darauf zu achten, dass irrelevante Informationen nicht zur unnötigen Vergrößerung des Kataloges führen. Um durchgängig eine größtmögliche Nutzerorientierung bieten zu können, sollten die gewünschten Prioritäten der Erschließung in einer Richtlinie festgehalten werden. Zur Interpretation von Bildern wurde von Panofsky ein 3-Stufen-Modell entwickelt, dass sich in prä- oder vor-ikonografische, ikonografische Beschreibung und ikonologische Interpretation unterteilen lässt. In der ersten Stufe werden nur die dargestellten Dinge oder Personen skizziert, ohne ihre Bedeutung zueinander zu interpretieren. Dies erfolgt erst in der zweiten Stufe. Hier wird das Ahema des Kunstwerkes allerdings ohne weitere Deutung benannt. In der dritten Stufe wird schließlich geklärt, warum dieses Werk so geschaffen wurde und nicht anders.
  6. Almeida, C.C. de: ¬The methodological influence of Peirce's pragmatism on knowledge organization (2012) 0.02 
    0.022969227 = product of:
  0.08039229 = sum of:
    0.067735024 = weight(_text_:interpretation in 142) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.067735024 = score(doc=142,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.21405315 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.7281795 = idf(docFreq=390, maxDocs=44218)
          0.037368443 = queryNorm
        0.3164402 = fieldWeight in 142, 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=142)
    0.01265727 = product of:
      0.02531454 = sum of:
        0.02531454 = weight(_text_:22 in 142) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.02531454 = score(doc=142,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.13085791 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.037368443 = queryNorm
            0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 142, 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=142)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.2857143 = coord(2/7)
    Abstract
    Information and knowledge organization in Brazil has been historically influenced by theoretical linguistics. However, some aspects related to language theory and its interface with philosophy need to be further investigated, particularly the semiotic interpretation of information and knowledge organization processes. In order to advance a dialogue with the philosophy and semiotics of Charles Peirce (1839-1914), a theoretical and bibliographical study was carried out so as to understand and evaluate the contributions of the Peircean thought to information organization. It was found that several aspects of Peirce's work, viewed as a whole and not just semiotic concepts, suggest fundamental points to explain issues in information and knowledge organization. Basing on the analysis of Thellefsen's studies, this research presents some arguments aimed at reframing Peirce's pragmatism, which should no longer be mistakenly considered as a doctrine of practical results, but as a useful methodological approach for professionals dealing with knowledge organization in the field of Information Science.
    Content
    Beitrag einer Section "Selected Papers from the 1ST Brazilian Conference on Knowledge Organization And Representation, Faculdade de Ciência da Informação, Campus Universitário Darcy Ribeiro Brasília, DF Brasil, October 20-22, 2011" Vgl.: http://www.ergon-verlag.de/isko_ko/downloads/ko_39_2012_3_f.pdf.
  7. Sosinska-Kalata, B.: Semantization and standardization : cooperative or conflicting trends in knowledge organization? (2014) 0.02 
    0.022969227 = product of:
  0.08039229 = sum of:
    0.067735024 = weight(_text_:interpretation in 1475) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.067735024 = score(doc=1475,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.21405315 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.7281795 = idf(docFreq=390, maxDocs=44218)
          0.037368443 = queryNorm
        0.3164402 = fieldWeight in 1475, 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=1475)
    0.01265727 = product of:
      0.02531454 = sum of:
        0.02531454 = weight(_text_:22 in 1475) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.02531454 = score(doc=1475,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.13085791 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.037368443 = queryNorm
            0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 1475, 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=1475)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.2857143 = coord(2/7)
    Abstract
    There are two most important trends observed in research on knowledge organization (KO) and in the development of knowledge organization systems (KOS) used in practice, i.e. semantization and standardization. These two trends determine current approaches to the development of methods and tools for organizing access to the digitally recorded knowledge in information systems and networks. Fundamental for the semantization of knowledge records is the creation and use of KOS with strong semantics which enable accurate representation of meanings in specified contexts. Standardization requires the unification of methods and tools for representing knowledge recorded in information resources. In practice it is often achieved by the use of universal KOS and implies generalization and homogenization of content representation that makes difficult to identify different interpretation of the phenomena and problems discussed in particular epistemological and cultural contexts. It is argued that the standardization of methods and tools for the representation of knowledge resources accessible in digital environment should not and does not have to imply this kind of generalization and simplification of the representation of their semantic content.
    Source
    Knowledge organization in the 21st century: between historical patterns and future prospects. Proceedings of the Thirteenth International ISKO Conference 19-22 May 2014, Kraków, Poland. Ed.: Wieslaw Babik
  8. 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
  9. Hangel, N.; Schmidt-Pfister, D.: Why do you publish? : on the tensions between generating scientific knowledge and publication pressure (2017) 0.02 
    0.022969227 = product of:
  0.08039229 = sum of:
    0.067735024 = weight(_text_:interpretation in 4054) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.067735024 = score(doc=4054,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.21405315 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.7281795 = idf(docFreq=390, maxDocs=44218)
          0.037368443 = queryNorm
        0.3164402 = fieldWeight in 4054, 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=4054)
    0.01265727 = product of:
      0.02531454 = sum of:
        0.02531454 = weight(_text_:22 in 4054) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.02531454 = score(doc=4054,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.13085791 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.037368443 = queryNorm
            0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 4054, 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=4054)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.2857143 = coord(2/7)
    Abstract
    Purpose The purpose of this paper is to examine researchers' motivations to publish by comparing different career stages (PhD students; temporarily employed postdocs/new professors; scholars with permanent employment) with regard to epistemic, pragmatic, and personal motives. Design/methodology/approach This qualitative analysis is mainly based on semi-structured narrative interviews with 91 researchers in the humanities, social, and natural sciences, based at six renowned (anonymous) universities in Germany, the UK, and the USA. These narratives contain answers to the direct question "why do you publish?" as well as remarks on motivations to publish in relation to other questions and themes. The interdisciplinary interpretation is based on both sociological science studies and philosophy of science in practice. Findings At each career stage, epistemic, pragmatic, and personal motivations to publish are weighed differently. Confirming earlier studies, the authors find that PhD students and postdoctoral researchers in temporary positions mainly feel pressured to publish for career-related reasons. However, across status groups, researchers also want to publish in order to support collective knowledge generation. Research limitations/implications The sample of interviewees may be biased toward those interested in reflecting on their day-to-day work. Social implications Continuous and collective reflection is imperative for preventing uncritical internalization of pragmatic reasons to publish. Creating occasions for reflection is a task not only of researchers themselves, but also of administrators, funders, and other stakeholders. Originality/value Most studies have illuminated how researchers publish while adapting to or growing into the contemporary publish-or-perish culture. This paper addresses the rarely asked question why researchers publish at all.
    Date
    20. 1.2015 18:30:22
  10. Alkhodair, S.A.; Fung, B.C.M.; Patrick, O.R.; Hung, C.K.: Improving interpretations of topic modeling in microblogs (2018) 0.02 
    0.022969227 = product of:
  0.08039229 = sum of:
    0.067735024 = weight(_text_:interpretation in 4181) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.067735024 = score(doc=4181,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.21405315 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.7281795 = idf(docFreq=390, maxDocs=44218)
          0.037368443 = queryNorm
        0.3164402 = fieldWeight in 4181, 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=4181)
    0.01265727 = product of:
      0.02531454 = sum of:
        0.02531454 = weight(_text_:22 in 4181) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.02531454 = score(doc=4181,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.13085791 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.037368443 = queryNorm
            0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 4181, 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=4181)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.2857143 = coord(2/7)
    Abstract
    Topic models were proposed to detect the underlying semantic structure of large collections of text documents to facilitate the process of browsing and accessing documents with similar ideas and topics. Applying topic models to short text documents to extract meaningful topics is challenging. The problem becomes even more complicated when dealing with short and noisy micro-posts in Twitter that are about one general topic. In such a case, the goal of applying topic models is to extract subtopics. This results in topics represented by similar sets of keywords, which in turn makes the process of topic interpretation more confusing. In this paper we propose a new method that incorporates Twitter-LDA, WordNet, and hashtags to enhance the keyword labels that represent each topic. We emphasize the importance of different keywords to different topics based on the semantic relationships and the co-occurrences of keywords in hashtags. We also propose a method to find the best number of topics to represent the text document collection. Experiments on two real-life Twitter datasets on fashion suggest that our method performs better than the original Twitter-LDA in terms of perplexity, topic coherence, and the quality of keywords for topic labeling.
    Date
    22. 3.2018 18:05:56
  11. Frâncu, V.; Popescu, T.: Twenty years after : scientific research in the field of knowledge organization in Romania (1993-2012) (2014) 0.02 
    0.022969227 = product of:
  0.08039229 = sum of:
    0.067735024 = weight(_text_:interpretation in 4692) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.067735024 = score(doc=4692,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.21405315 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.7281795 = idf(docFreq=390, maxDocs=44218)
          0.037368443 = queryNorm
        0.3164402 = fieldWeight in 4692, 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=4692)
    0.01265727 = product of:
      0.02531454 = sum of:
        0.02531454 = weight(_text_:22 in 4692) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.02531454 = score(doc=4692,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.13085791 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.037368443 = queryNorm
            0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 4692, 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=4692)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.2857143 = coord(2/7)
    Abstract
    The main point that we want to state in this study is that research in the field of knowledge organization in Romania over the last twenty years is unequally and unjustly distributed among different professional categories ranging from library and information science faculty members, library professionals, software tools developers and independent researchers. The special condition of library and information science functioning as a university department in Romania with an interruption of 20 years (1970-1990) affected the overall situation of scientific research in the specific fields associated with this discipline. Our study has three stages: data collection, data recording and data interpretation. The primary outcomes of the scientific research activities considered are publications (books, book chapters and journal articles). Given this, our interest will be directed towards analyzing to what extent research and writing for publication have an impact on the evolution of Romanian libraries over this twenty years span.
    Source
    Knowledge organization in the 21st century: between historical patterns and future prospects. Proceedings of the Thirteenth International ISKO Conference 19-22 May 2014, Kraków, Poland. Ed.: Wieslaw Babik
  12. Frandsen, T.F.; Nicolaisen, J.: Citation behavior : a large-scale test of the persuasion by name-dropping hypothesis (2017) 0.02 
    0.020112088 = product of:
  0.1407846 = sum of:
    0.1407846 = weight(_text_:interpretation in 3601) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.1407846 = score(doc=3601,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.21405315 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.7281795 = idf(docFreq=390, maxDocs=44218)
          0.037368443 = queryNorm
        0.65770864 = fieldWeight in 3601, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          5.7281795 = idf(docFreq=390, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=3601)
  0.14285715 = coord(1/7)
    Abstract
    Citation frequencies are commonly interpreted as measures of quality or impact. Yet, the true nature of citations and their proper interpretation have been the center of a long, but still unresolved discussion in Bibliometrics. A comparison of 67,578 pairs of studies on the same healthcare topic, with the same publication age (1-15 years) reveals that when one of the studies is being selected for citation, it has on average received about three times as many citations as the other study. However, the average citation-gap between selected or deselected studies narrows slightly over time, which fits poorly with the name-dropping interpretation and better with the quality and impact-interpretation. The results demonstrate that authors in the field of Healthcare tend to cite highly cited documents when they have a choice. This is more likely caused by differences related to quality than differences related to status of the publications cited.
  13. Kaeser, E.: ¬Das postfaktische Zeitalter (2016) 0.02 
    0.019490037 = product of:
  0.068215124 = sum of:
    0.05747507 = weight(_text_:interpretation in 3080) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.05747507 = score(doc=3080,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.21405315 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.7281795 = idf(docFreq=390, maxDocs=44218)
          0.037368443 = queryNorm
        0.2685084 = fieldWeight in 3080, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          5.7281795 = idf(docFreq=390, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0234375 = fieldNorm(doc=3080)
    0.01074005 = product of:
      0.0214801 = sum of:
        0.0214801 = weight(_text_:22 in 3080) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.0214801 = score(doc=3080,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.13085791 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.037368443 = queryNorm
            0.16414827 = fieldWeight in 3080, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0234375 = fieldNorm(doc=3080)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.2857143 = coord(2/7)
    Content
    "Es gibt Daten, Informationen und Fakten. Wenn man mir eine Zahlenreihe vorsetzt, dann handelt es sich um Daten: unterscheidbare Einheiten, im Fachjargon: Items. Wenn man mir sagt, dass diese Items stündliche Temperaturangaben der Aare im Berner Marzilibad bedeuten, dann verfüge ich über Information - über interpretierte Daten. Wenn man mir sagt, dies seien die gemessenen Aaretemperaturen am 22. August 2016 im Marzili, dann ist das ein Faktum: empirisch geprüfte interpretierte Daten. Dieser Dreischritt - Unterscheiden, Interpretieren, Prüfen - bildet quasi das Bindemittel des Faktischen, «the matter of fact». Wir alle führen den Dreischritt ständig aus und gelangen so zu einem relativ verlässlichen Wissen und Urteilsvermögen betreffend die Dinge des Alltags. Aber wie schon die Kurzcharakterisierung durchblicken lässt, bilden Fakten nicht den Felsengrund der Realität. Sie sind kritikanfällig, sowohl von der Interpretation wie auch von der Prüfung her gesehen. Um bei unserem Beispiel zu bleiben: Es kann durchaus sein, dass man uns zwei unterschiedliche «faktische» Temperaturverläufe der Aare am 22. August 2016 vorsetzt.
    - Das Amen des postmodernen Denkens Was nun? Wir führen den Unterschied zum Beispiel auf Ablesefehler (also auf falsche Interpretation) zurück oder aber auf verschiedene Messmethoden. Sofort ist ein Deutungsspielraum offen. Nietzsches berühmtes Wort hallt wider, dass es nur Interpretationen, keine Fakten gebe. Oder wie es im Englischen heisst: «Facts are factitious» - Fakten sind Artefakte, sie sind künstlich. Diese Ansicht ist quasi das Amen des postmodernen Denkens. Und als besonders tückisch an ihr entpuppt sich ihre Halbwahrheit. Es stimmt, dass Fakten oft das Ergebnis eines langwierigen Erkenntnisprozesses sind, vor allem heute, wo wir es immer mehr mit Aussagen über komplexe Systeme wie Migrationsdynamik, Meteorologie oder Märkte zu tun bekommen. Der Interpretationsdissens unter Experten ist ja schon fast sprichwörtlich.
  14. Svenonius, E.: Bibliographic entities and their uses (2018) 0.02 
    0.019352864 = product of:
  0.13547005 = sum of:
    0.13547005 = weight(_text_:interpretation in 5187) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.13547005 = score(doc=5187,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.21405315 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.7281795 = idf(docFreq=390, maxDocs=44218)
          0.037368443 = queryNorm
        0.6328804 = fieldWeight in 5187, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          5.7281795 = idf(docFreq=390, maxDocs=44218)
          0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=5187)
  0.14285715 = coord(1/7)
    Abstract
    This article provides an interpretation of the structure of classification theory literature, from the late 19th Century to the present, by dividing it into four orders, and then describes the relationship between that and manuals for classification design.
  15. Moll, S.: ¬Der Urknall des Internets : 20 Jahre WWW (2011) 0.02 
    0.01785056 = product of:
  0.12495391 = sum of:
    0.12495391 = weight(_text_:quantenphysik in 3720) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.12495391 = score(doc=3720,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.34748885 = queryWeight, product of:
          9.298992 = idf(docFreq=10, maxDocs=44218)
          0.037368443 = queryNorm
        0.35959113 = fieldWeight in 3720, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          9.298992 = idf(docFreq=10, maxDocs=44218)
          0.02734375 = fieldNorm(doc=3720)
  0.14285715 = coord(1/7)
    Content
    "Alle großen Erfindungen der Menschheitsgeschichte haben einen Entstehungsmythos. Einsteins Trambahnfahrt durch Zürich beispielsweise oder der berühmte Apfel, der Newton angeblich auf den Kopf gefallen ist. Als Tim Berners-Lee, damals Physikstudent in Manchester, Mitte der 70er Jahre mit seinem Vater in einem Stadtpark unter einem Baum saß, unterhielten sich die beiden darüber, dass sie doch in ihrem Garten auch einen solchen Baum gebrauchen könnten. Der Vater, ein Mathematiker, der an einem der ersten kommerziell genutzten Computer der Welt arbeitete, bemerkte, dass die Fähigkeit, die abstrakte Idee eines schattigen Baumes auf einen anderen Ort zu übertragen, doch eine einmalig menschliche sei. Computer könnten so etwas nicht. Das Problem ließ Berners-Lee nicht los. Deshalb suchte er, während er in den 80er Jahren als Berater am europäischen Labor für Quantenphysik (CERN) in der Schweiz arbeitete, noch immer nach einem Weg, seinem Computer beizubringen, Verbindungen zwischen den disparaten Dokumenten und Notizen auf seiner Festplatte herzustellen. Er entwarf deshalb ein System, das heute so alltäglich ist, wie Kleingeld. Lee stellte eine direkte Verknüpfung her zwischen Wörtern und Begriffen in Dokumenten und den gleichen Begriffen in anderen Dokumenten: Der Link war geboren.
  16. Junger, U.: Basisinformationen zur Universellen Dezimalklassifikation (UDK) (2018) 0.02 
    0.016846253 = product of:
  0.11792377 = sum of:
    0.11792377 = sum of:
      0.0774205 = weight(_text_:anwendung in 4337) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.0774205 = score(doc=4337,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.1809185 = queryWeight, product of:
            4.8414783 = idf(docFreq=948, maxDocs=44218)
            0.037368443 = queryNorm
          0.42793027 = fieldWeight in 4337, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            4.8414783 = idf(docFreq=948, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=4337)
      0.040503263 = weight(_text_:22 in 4337) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.040503263 = score(doc=4337,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.13085791 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.037368443 = queryNorm
          0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 4337, 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=4337)
  0.14285715 = coord(1/7)
    Date
    7. 7.2018 17:22:00
    Source
    Klassifikationen in Bibliotheken: Theorie - Anwendung - Nutzen. Hrsg.: H. Alex, G. Bee u. U. Junger
  17. Lorenz, B.: Zur Theorie und Terminologie der bibliothekarischen Klassifikation (2018) 0.02 
    0.016846253 = product of:
  0.11792377 = sum of:
    0.11792377 = sum of:
      0.0774205 = weight(_text_:anwendung in 4339) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.0774205 = score(doc=4339,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.1809185 = queryWeight, product of:
            4.8414783 = idf(docFreq=948, maxDocs=44218)
            0.037368443 = queryNorm
          0.42793027 = fieldWeight in 4339, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            4.8414783 = idf(docFreq=948, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=4339)
      0.040503263 = weight(_text_:22 in 4339) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.040503263 = score(doc=4339,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.13085791 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.037368443 = queryNorm
          0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 4339, 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=4339)
  0.14285715 = coord(1/7)
    Pages
    S.1-22
    Source
    Klassifikationen in Bibliotheken: Theorie - Anwendung - Nutzen. Hrsg.: H. Alex, G. Bee u. U. Junger
  18. Berti, Jr., D.W.; Lima, G.; Maculan, B.; Soergel, D.: Computer-assisted checking of conceptual relationships in a large thesaurus (2018) 0.02 
    0.016846253 = product of:
  0.11792377 = sum of:
    0.11792377 = sum of:
      0.0774205 = weight(_text_:anwendung in 4721) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.0774205 = score(doc=4721,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.1809185 = queryWeight, product of:
            4.8414783 = idf(docFreq=948, maxDocs=44218)
            0.037368443 = queryNorm
          0.42793027 = fieldWeight in 4721, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            4.8414783 = idf(docFreq=948, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=4721)
      0.040503263 = weight(_text_:22 in 4721) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.040503263 = score(doc=4721,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.13085791 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.037368443 = queryNorm
          0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 4721, 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=4721)
  0.14285715 = coord(1/7)
    Date
    17. 1.2019 19:04:22
    Theme
    Konzeption und Anwendung des Prinzips Thesaurus
  19. Gödert, W.: Semantische Wissensrepräsentation und Interoperabilität : Teil 2: Ein formales Modell semantischer Interoperabilität (2010) 0.02 
    0.0154822925 = product of:
  0.10837604 = sum of:
    0.10837604 = weight(_text_:interpretation in 1530) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.10837604 = score(doc=1530,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.21405315 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.7281795 = idf(docFreq=390, maxDocs=44218)
          0.037368443 = queryNorm
        0.5063043 = fieldWeight in 1530, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          5.7281795 = idf(docFreq=390, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=1530)
  0.14285715 = coord(1/7)
    Abstract
    In diesem zweiten Teil wird ein formales Modell zur semantischen Interoperabilität als Brücke zwischen formaler Modellierung und intellektueller Interpretation vorgestellt, das ein besseres Verständnis der zentralen Begriffe von semantischer Ähnlichkeit und Verschiedenheit von Begriffen und Klassen, sowohl als elementare Inhaltsentitäten von Dokumentationssprachen als auch als synthetische Repräsentationen von Dokumentinhalten, ermöglichen soll.
  20. Harej, V.; Zumer, M.: Analysis of FRBR user tasks (2013) 0.02 
    0.0154822925 = product of:
  0.10837604 = sum of:
    0.10837604 = weight(_text_:interpretation in 1955) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.10837604 = score(doc=1955,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.21405315 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.7281795 = idf(docFreq=390, maxDocs=44218)
          0.037368443 = queryNorm
        0.5063043 = fieldWeight in 1955, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          5.7281795 = idf(docFreq=390, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=1955)
  0.14285715 = coord(1/7)
    Abstract
    FRBR, FRAD, and FRSAD models propose user tasks as a way to address and categorize functions that a catalog should support. The user tasks are not harmonized among these models, but to do that, they should first be fully understood and analyzed, especially "select" and "identify." We decided to look at the FRBR user tasks from the perspective of interactive information retrieval (IIR). Several IIR models were reviewed and Ellis' and Belkin's models were chosen for further analysis and interpretation of FRBR "select" and "identify" tasks.

Authors

Languages

  • e 531
  • d 205
  • a 1
  • More… Less…

Types

  • el 58
  • b 4
  • More… Less…

Themes