Search (26 results, page 1 of 2)

0.24358718 = product of:
  0.81195724 = sum of:
    0.2706524 = weight(_text_:2f in 4031) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.2706524 = score(doc=4031,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.291877 = queryWeight, product of:
          8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03442753 = queryNorm
        0.92728245 = fieldWeight in 4031, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=4031)
    0.2706524 = weight(_text_:2f in 4031) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.2706524 = score(doc=4031,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.291877 = queryWeight, product of:
          8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03442753 = queryNorm
        0.92728245 = fieldWeight in 4031, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=4031)
    0.2706524 = weight(_text_:2f in 4031) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.2706524 = score(doc=4031,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.291877 = queryWeight, product of:
          8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03442753 = queryNorm
        0.92728245 = fieldWeight in 4031, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=4031)
  0.3 = coord(3/10)

Footnote

DOI: 10.24894/HWPh.5033. Vgl. unter: https://www.schwabeonline.ch/schwabe-xaveropp/elibrary/start.xav#__elibrary__%2F%2F*%5B%40attr_id%3D%27verw.allgemeinesbesonderes%27%5D__1515856414979.

0.026829172 = product of:
  0.06707293 = sum of:
    0.0070895553 = product of:
      0.0141791105 = sum of:
        0.0141791105 = weight(_text_:web in 5089) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.0141791105 = score(doc=5089,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.11235461 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03442753 = queryNorm
            0.12619963 = fieldWeight in 5089, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
              0.02734375 = fieldNorm(doc=5089)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    0.019668503 = weight(_text_:world in 5089) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.019668503 = score(doc=5089,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.1323281 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.8436708 = idf(docFreq=2573, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03442753 = queryNorm
        0.14863437 = fieldWeight in 5089, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.8436708 = idf(docFreq=2573, maxDocs=44218)
          0.02734375 = fieldNorm(doc=5089)
    0.026135758 = weight(_text_:wide in 5089) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.026135758 = score(doc=5089,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.15254007 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.4307585 = idf(docFreq=1430, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03442753 = queryNorm
        0.171337 = fieldWeight in 5089, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          4.4307585 = idf(docFreq=1430, maxDocs=44218)
          0.02734375 = fieldNorm(doc=5089)
    0.0141791105 = weight(_text_:web in 5089) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0141791105 = score(doc=5089,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.11235461 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03442753 = queryNorm
        0.12619963 = fieldWeight in 5089, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
          0.02734375 = fieldNorm(doc=5089)
  0.4 = coord(4/10)

Abstract

The 8th International Conference on Conceptual Structures - Logical, Linguistic, and Computational Issues (ICCS 2000) brings together a wide range of researchers and practitioners working with conceptual structures. During the last few years, the ICCS conference series has considerably widened its scope on different kinds of conceptual structures, stimulating research across domain boundaries. We hope that this stimulation is further enhanced by ICCS 2000 joining the long tradition of conferences in Darmstadt with extensive, lively discussions. This volume consists of contributions presented at ICCS 2000, complementing the volume "Conceptual Structures: Logical, Linguistic, and Computational Issues" (B. Ganter, G.W. Mineau (Eds.), LNAI 1867, Springer, Berlin-Heidelberg 2000). It contains submissions reviewed by the program committee, and position papers. We wish to express our appreciation to all the authors of submitted papers, to the general chair, the program chair, the editorial board, the program committee, and to the additional reviewers for making ICCS 2000 a valuable contribution in the knowledge processing research field. Special thanks go to the local organizers for making the conference an enjoyable and inspiring event. We are grateful to Darmstadt University of Technology, the Ernst Schröder Center for Conceptual Knowledge Processing, the Center for Interdisciplinary Studies in Technology, the Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft, Land Hessen, and NaviCon GmbH for their generous support

Content

Concepts & Language: Knowledge organization by procedures of natural language processing. A case study using the method GABEK (J. Zelger, J. Gadner) - Computer aided narrative analysis using conceptual graphs (H. Schärfe, P. 0hrstrom) - Pragmatic representation of argumentative text: a challenge for the conceptual graph approach (H. Irandoust, B. Moulin) - Conceptual graphs as a knowledge representation core in a complex language learning environment (G. Angelova, A. Nenkova, S. Boycheva, T. Nikolov) - Conceptual Modeling and Ontologies: Relationships and actions in conceptual categories (Ch. Landauer, K.L. Bellman) - Concept approximations for formal concept analysis (J. Saquer, J.S. Deogun) - Faceted information representation (U. Priß) - Simple concept graphs with universal quantifiers (J. Tappe) - A framework for comparing methods for using or reusing multiple ontologies in an application (J. van ZyI, D. Corbett) - Designing task/method knowledge-based systems with conceptual graphs (M. Leclère, F.Trichet, Ch. Choquet) - A logical ontology (J. Farkas, J. Sarbo) - Algorithms and Tools: Fast concept analysis (Ch. Lindig) - A framework for conceptual graph unification (D. Corbett) - Visual CP representation of knowledge (H.D. Pfeiffer, R.T. Hartley) - Maximal isojoin for representing software textual specifications and detecting semantic anomalies (Th. Charnois) - Troika: using grids, lattices and graphs in knowledge acquisition (H.S. Delugach, B.E. Lampkin) - Open world theorem prover for conceptual graphs (J.E. Heaton, P. Kocura) - NetCare: a practical conceptual graphs software tool (S. Polovina, D. Strang) - CGWorld - a web based workbench for conceptual graphs management and applications (P. Dobrev, K. Toutanova) - Position papers: The edition project: Peirce's existential graphs (R. Mülller) - Mining association rules using formal concept analysis (N. Pasquier) - Contextual logic summary (R Wille) - Information channels and conceptual scaling (K.E. Wolff) - Spatial concepts - a rule exploration (S. Rudolph) - The TEXT-TO-ONTO learning environment (A. Mädche, St. Staab) - Controlling the semantics of metadata on audio-visual documents using ontologies (Th. Dechilly, B. Bachimont) - Building the ontological foundations of a terminology from natural language to conceptual graphs with Ribosome, a knowledge extraction system (Ch. Jacquelinet, A. Burgun) - CharGer: some lessons learned and new directions (H.S. Delugach) - Knowledge management using conceptual graphs (W.K. Pun)

0.009060059 = product of:
  0.09060059 = sum of:
    0.09060059 = weight(_text_:gestaltung in 6596) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.09060059 = score(doc=6596,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.2008246 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.8332562 = idf(docFreq=351, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03442753 = queryNorm
        0.45114288 = fieldWeight in 6596, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          5.8332562 = idf(docFreq=351, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=6596)
  0.1 = coord(1/10)

Abstract

Unter Visualisierung wird hier die planende Gestaltung und zeichnerische Realisierung eines Bildes nach einer sprachlich vermittelten Vorgabe eines Themas verstanden. Der Beitrag grenzt diese Aufgabenstellung von anderen Ausgangssituationen beim Zeichnen ab. Im Hauptteil dieser Arbeit wird ein kognitives Modell des Visualisierungsprozesses entworfen. Dabei werden verschiedene Phasen von der Erkennung der Vorgabe bis zur visuellen Wahrnehmung der schon soweit realisierten Zeichnung unterschieden. Aus einer begrifflichen Repräsentation des Themas entsteht über Erinnerungsbilder und Vorstellungsbilder das innere Bild der Zeichnung. Mit der Beschreibung des Modells werden grundlegende Fragen nach dem Zusammenwirken von begrifflichen und bildhaften Repräsentationen aufgeworfen und diskutiert.

0.0072921137 = product of:
  0.036460567 = sum of:
    0.012153522 = product of:
      0.024307044 = sum of:
        0.024307044 = weight(_text_:web in 3218) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.024307044 = score(doc=3218,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.11235461 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03442753 = queryNorm
            0.21634221 = fieldWeight in 3218, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=3218)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    0.024307044 = weight(_text_:web in 3218) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.024307044 = score(doc=3218,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.11235461 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03442753 = queryNorm
        0.21634221 = fieldWeight in 3218, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=3218)
  0.2 = coord(2/10)

Abstract

Begriffsorientiertes Information Retrieval bedarf einer informationswissenschaftlichen Theorie der Begriffe sowie der semantischen Relationen. Ein Begriff wird durch seine Intension und Extension sowie durch Definitionen bestimmt. Dem Problem der Vagheit begegnen wir durch die Einführung von Prototypen. Wichtige Definitionsarten sind die Begriffserklärung (nach Aristoteles) und die Definition über Familienähnlichkeiten (im Sinne Wittgensteins). Wir modellieren Begriffe als Frames (in der Version von Barsalou). Die zentrale paradigmatische Relation in Wissensordnungen ist die Hierarchie, die in verschiedene Arten zu gliedern ist: Hyponymie zerfällt in die Taxonomie und die einfache Hyponymie, Meronymie in eine ganze Reihe unterschiedlicher Teil-Ganzes-Beziehungen. Wichtig für praktische Anwendungen ist die Transitivität der jeweiligen Relation. Eine unspezifische Assoziationsrelation ist bei den angepeilten Anwendungen wenig hilfreich und wird durch ein Bündel von generalisierbaren und fachspezifischen Relationen ersetzt. Unser Ansatz fundiert neue Optionen der Anwendung von Wissensordnungen in der Informationspraxis neben ihrem "klassischen" Einsatz beim Information Retrieval: Erweiterung von Suchanfragen (Anwendung der semantischen Nähe), automatisches Schlussfolgern (Anwendung der terminologischen Logik in Vorbereitung eines semantischen Web) und automatische Berechnungen (bei Funktionalbegriffen mit numerischen Wertangaben).

0.0051771766 = product of:
  0.051771764 = sum of:
    0.051771764 = weight(_text_:gestaltung in 5867) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.051771764 = score(doc=5867,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.2008246 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.8332562 = idf(docFreq=351, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03442753 = queryNorm
        0.25779593 = fieldWeight in 5867, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          5.8332562 = idf(docFreq=351, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=5867)
  0.1 = coord(1/10)

Abstract

Unter den verschiedenen Möglichkeiten, das Wissen der Menschen zu ordnen, um sich den Überblick darüber zu erhalten, haben die Kategorien schon seit dem Altertum eine wichtige Rolle gespielt. Speziell auf dem Gebiet des Bibliothekswesens und der Informationsbereitstellung hat Ranganathan (1967) mit der Einführung von "Fundamental Categories" (Personality, Matter, Energy, Space, Time) schon in den 30-er Jahren des 20. Jahrhunderts neue Wege beschritten, ohne damit allerdings große Resonanz in der Fachwelt auszulösen zu können. Im traditionellen Bibliothekswesen hätte der Übergang auf ein kategoriengestütztes Informationssystem dieser Art wohl eine allzu große Umstellung bewirkt. Bei einem Neubeginn, wie er in der jüngeren Vergangenheit zu vielen Malen stattgefunden hat, hat man sich in Unkenntnis oder Abneigung dem Einsatz dieses ordnungschaffenden Werkzeuge verschlossen. Dabei lassen sich gerade bei der Verfügbarkeit von Computertechnologie große Fortschritte erzielen, wenn sich die Indexsprachen auf eine Gruppe von semantischen Kategorien stützen. Die Gestaltung und Fortentwicklung solcher Sprachen zu hoher Effizienz ist sogar ohne ein Fundament von semantischen Kategorien noch nicht gelungen und auch nicht denkbar. Bei den semantischen Kategorien handelt es sich um Begriffstypen, welche auf dem betreffenden Gebiet in den dortigen Publikationen und Fragestellungen eine besonders große Rolle spielen und deswegen besondere Aufmerksamkeit erfordern. In Ergänzung der Ausführungen von Bauer (2004) zu den Einsatzmöglichkeiten von Kategorien in der Wissensorganisation allgemein werden nachfolgend sieben Anwendungen eines Konzepts von semantischen Kategorien kurz erörtert. Sie haben in einem Großsystem zum Patentwesen in der Chemie zu einem Informationssystem von bisher noch immer unübertroffen großer Leistungsfähigkeit geführt. Das ursprüngliche ranganathansche Kategorienkonzept für das Bibliothekswesen ist dort dem Bedarf auf dem Gebiet der reinen und angewandten Chemie angepasst worden (vgl. Fugmann 1999, S. 23, 49-64). Es umfasst: STOFF, LEBEWESEN, Vorrichtung, VORGANG, ATTRIBUT von den vorgenannten kategorialen Gegenständen, d.h. Eigenschaft und Verwendung von Stoff, Lebewesen, Vorrichtung, Vorgang. Nachfolgend werden sieben solcher Einsatzmöglichkeiten in einem System zur gezielten Informationsbereitstellung aufgezählt: 1. Die Definition von schlagwörtern oder Deskriptoren 2. Der Inhalt der Indexsprache 3. Das Ordnen des Wortschatzes der Indexsprache 4. Der Unterteilungsgesichtspunkt 5. Die Begriffsanalyse 6. Die Begriffssynthese 7. Die Vermeidung unerfüllbarer Suchbedingungen

0.0044804155 = product of:
  0.044804152 = sum of:
    0.044804152 = weight(_text_:wide in 1192) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.044804152 = score(doc=1192,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.15254007 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.4307585 = idf(docFreq=1430, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03442753 = queryNorm
        0.29372054 = fieldWeight in 1192, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          4.4307585 = idf(docFreq=1430, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1192)
  0.1 = coord(1/10)

Abstract

This chapter presents a broad survey of the cause-effect relation, with particular emphasis an how the relation is expressed in text. Philosophers have been grappling with the concept of causation for centuries. Researchers in social psychology have found that the human mind has a very complex mechanism for identifying and attributing the cause for an event. Inferring cause-effect relations between events and statements has also been found to be an important part of reading and text comprehension, especially for narrative text. Though many of the cause-effect relations in text are implied and have to be inferred by the reader, there is also a wide variety of linguistic expressions for explicitly indicating cause and effect. In addition, it has been found that certain words have "causal valence"-they bias the reader to attribute cause in certain ways. Cause-effect relations can also be divided into several different types.

0.0037336797 = product of:
  0.037336797 = sum of:
    0.037336797 = weight(_text_:wide in 3217) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.037336797 = score(doc=3217,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.15254007 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.4307585 = idf(docFreq=1430, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03442753 = queryNorm
        0.24476713 = fieldWeight in 3217, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          4.4307585 = idf(docFreq=1430, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3217)
  0.1 = coord(1/10)

Abstract

In this chapter I propose that frames provide the fundamental representation of knowledge in human cognition. In the first section, I raise problems with the feature list representations often found in theories of knowledge, and I sketch the solutions that frames provide to them. In the second section, I examine the three fundamental concepts of frames: attribute-value sets, structural invariants, and constraints. Because frames also represents the attributes, values, structural invariants, and constraints within a frame, the mechanism that constructs frames builds them recursively. The frame theory I propose borrows heavily from previous frame theories, although its collection of representational components is somewhat unique. Furthermore, frame theorists generally assume that frames are rigid configurations of independent attributes, whereas I propose that frames are dynamic relational structures whose form is flexible and context dependent. In the third section, I illustrate how frames support a wide variety of representational tasks central to conceptual processing in natural and artificial intelligence. Frames can represent exemplars and propositions, prototypes and membership, subordinates and taxonomies. Frames can also represent conceptual combinations, event sequences, rules, and plans. In the fourth section, I show how frames define the extent of conceptual fields and how they provide a powerful productive mechanism for generating specific concepts within a field.

0.0031237507 = product of:
  0.031237505 = sum of:
    0.031237505 = product of:
      0.046856258 = sum of:
        0.023533981 = weight(_text_:29 in 33) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.023533981 = score(doc=33,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.12110529 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03442753 = queryNorm
            0.19432661 = fieldWeight in 33, 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=33)
        0.023322277 = weight(_text_:22 in 33) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.023322277 = score(doc=33,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.12055935 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03442753 = queryNorm
            0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 33, 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=33)
      0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
  0.1 = coord(1/10)

Date

22. 1.2012 13:11:25

Source

Knowledge organization. 39(2012) no.1, S.29-54

0.0029832644 = product of:
  0.029832644 = sum of:
    0.029832644 = product of:
      0.05966529 = sum of:
        0.05966529 = weight(_text_:seite in 6893) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.05966529 = score(doc=6893,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.19283076 = queryWeight, product of:
              5.601063 = idf(docFreq=443, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03442753 = queryNorm
            0.3094179 = fieldWeight in 6893, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              5.601063 = idf(docFreq=443, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=6893)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.1 = coord(1/10)

Abstract

Wissen ist wichtig. Heutzutage sind es gerade Wirtschaftsunternehmen, die erkannt haben, dass sie auf Kenntnisse und Bildung ihrer Mitarbeiter nicht verzichten können. Wissen tritt gleichberechtigt an die Seite von Arbeit und Kapital Gemeinsam bilden sie das Fundament für moderne Industrieunternehmen. Aber was ist eigentlich Wissen? Wie wird Wissen erworben und weitergegeben? Dies sind Fragen, auf die schon viele sehr unterschiedliche Antworten gegeben worden sind. Scheinbar selbstverständliche Vorgänge, wie Verstehen und Erkennen berühren in Wahrheit die Grundlagen unseres Denkens, und wie Denken eigenlich vor sich geht; ist trotz aller Erklärungsversuche der Biochemiker nicht zufrieden stellend beantwortet. Der Psychologe Thomas Bernhard Seiler lässt denn auch in seinem Buch "Begreifen und Verstehen" die biologischen Modelle außen vor. Er geht davon aus, dass Verstehen der Vorgang des Erkennens ist. 'Erkennen' aber in eine Vielzahl von einzelnen Prozessen zerfällt. Die Stücke und Einheiten, aus denen der Erkenntnisvorgang besteht, nennt Seiler "Begriffe". Wissen besteht demnach aus Begriffen. "Begriff" ist sein zentraler Begriff, und an diesem Satz wird deutlich, wie schwierig das Terrain ist, auf dem Seiler sich bewegt, denn die Erklärung solcher Worte wie "Begriff" enthält oft das zu erklärende Wort selbst. Er meistert diese Aufgabe in bewundernswert klarer und verständlicher Sprache, wobei sein Buch aber durchaus nicht einfach zu lesen ist - konzentriertes Mitdenken ist gefordert, wenn Seller seine Leser von überschaubaren ersten Definitionen zum Zeichencharakter von Sprache und dann zu den Begriffstheorien der Philosophie und Psychologie führt. Populärwissenschaft ist das nicht, wohl aber Wissenschaft für Leute mit solider Schulbildung. Trotz aller Theorie stellt Seiler auch immer wieder den Menschen in den Mittelpunkt und macht deutlich, dass dieser eben nicht programmierbar Ist wie ein Computer. Begriffsbildung, also die Aneignung von Wissen, ist in Wahrheit höchst komplex und sehr individuell.

0.0025102913 = product of:
  0.025102912 = sum of:
    0.025102912 = product of:
      0.07530873 = sum of:
        0.07530873 = weight(_text_:29 in 6289) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.07530873 = score(doc=6289,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.12110529 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03442753 = queryNorm
            0.6218451 = fieldWeight in 6289, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
              0.125 = fieldNorm(doc=6289)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.1 = coord(1/10)

Date

5. 8.2001 13:29:43

0.0021965047 = product of:
  0.021965047 = sum of:
    0.021965047 = product of:
      0.06589514 = sum of:
        0.06589514 = weight(_text_:29 in 6290) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.06589514 = score(doc=6290,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.12110529 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03442753 = queryNorm
            0.5441145 = fieldWeight in 6290, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
              0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=6290)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.1 = coord(1/10)

Date

5. 8.2001 13:29:54

0.0021767458 = product of:
  0.021767458 = sum of:
    0.021767458 = product of:
      0.06530237 = sum of:
        0.06530237 = weight(_text_:22 in 880) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.06530237 = score(doc=880,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.12055935 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03442753 = queryNorm
            0.5416616 = fieldWeight in 880, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=880)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.1 = coord(1/10)

Pages

S.9-22

0.0018827185 = product of:
  0.018827185 = sum of:
    0.018827185 = product of:
      0.05648155 = sum of:
        0.05648155 = weight(_text_:29 in 3258) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.05648155 = score(doc=3258,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.12110529 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03442753 = queryNorm
            0.46638384 = fieldWeight in 3258, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
              0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=3258)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.1 = coord(1/10)

Date

28. 2.2017 13:29:03

0.0018657822 = product of:
  0.018657822 = sum of:
    0.018657822 = product of:
      0.055973463 = sum of:
        0.055973463 = weight(_text_:22 in 3904) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.055973463 = score(doc=3904,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.12055935 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03442753 = queryNorm
            0.46428138 = fieldWeight in 3904, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=3904)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.1 = coord(1/10)

Source

Nachrichten für Dokumentation. 22(1971) H.3, S.98-104 (T.1); H.4, S.143-150 (T.2)

0.0012551456 = product of:
  0.012551456 = sum of:
    0.012551456 = product of:
      0.037654366 = sum of:
        0.037654366 = weight(_text_:29 in 6013) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.037654366 = score(doc=6013,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.12110529 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03442753 = queryNorm
            0.31092256 = fieldWeight in 6013, 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=6013)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.1 = coord(1/10)

Date

20. 8.2006 16:29:27

0.0012438548 = product of:
  0.012438547 = sum of:
    0.012438547 = product of:
      0.03731564 = sum of:
        0.03731564 = weight(_text_:22 in 3726) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.03731564 = score(doc=3726,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.12055935 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03442753 = queryNorm
            0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 3726, 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=3726)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.1 = coord(1/10)

Source

Wissensspeicher in digitalen Räumen: Nachhaltigkeit - Verfügbarkeit - semantische Interoperabilität. Proceedings der 11. Tagung der Deutschen Sektion der Internationalen Gesellschaft für Wissensorganisation, Konstanz, 20. bis 22. Februar 2008. Hrsg.: J. Sieglerschmidt u. H.P.Ohly

0.0010883729 = product of:
  0.010883729 = sum of:
    0.010883729 = product of:
      0.032651186 = sum of:
        0.032651186 = weight(_text_:22 in 2574) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.032651186 = score(doc=2574,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.12055935 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03442753 = queryNorm
            0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 2574, 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=2574)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.1 = coord(1/10)

Date

22. 7.2000 19:17:40

0.0010883729 = product of:
  0.010883729 = sum of:
    0.010883729 = product of:
      0.032651186 = sum of:
        0.032651186 = weight(_text_:22 in 5710) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.032651186 = score(doc=5710,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.12055935 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03442753 = queryNorm
            0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 5710, 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=5710)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.1 = coord(1/10)

Pages

S.22-33

9.328911E-4 = product of:
  0.009328911 = sum of:
    0.009328911 = product of:
      0.027986731 = sum of:
        0.027986731 = weight(_text_:22 in 3060) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.027986731 = score(doc=3060,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.12055935 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03442753 = queryNorm
            0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 3060, 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=3060)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.1 = coord(1/10)

Source

LIBREAS: Library ideas. no.22, 2013, S.xx-xx

7.8446604E-4 = product of:
  0.00784466 = sum of:
    0.00784466 = product of:
      0.023533981 = sum of:
        0.023533981 = weight(_text_:29 in 6597) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.023533981 = score(doc=6597,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.12110529 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03442753 = queryNorm
            0.19432661 = fieldWeight in 6597, 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=6597)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.1 = coord(1/10)

Date

5.10.2001 13:29:15