Search (12 results, page 1 of 1)

  • × author_ss:"Lewandowski, D."
  1. Lewandowski, D.: Open-Access-Archiv für Bibliotheks- und Informationswissenschaft (2004) 0.05 
    0.04732267 = product of:
  0.09464534 = sum of:
    0.07375403 = weight(_text_:open in 2816) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.07375403 = score(doc=2816,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.20964009 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.5032015 = idf(docFreq=1330, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046553567 = queryNorm
        0.3518126 = fieldWeight in 2816, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          4.5032015 = idf(docFreq=1330, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2816)
    0.020891316 = product of:
      0.041782632 = sum of:
        0.041782632 = weight(_text_:access in 2816) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.041782632 = score(doc=2816,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.15778996 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.389428 = idf(docFreq=4053, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046553567 = queryNorm
            0.26479906 = fieldWeight in 2816, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              3.389428 = idf(docFreq=4053, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2816)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(2/4)
    Content
    "Für die Themenfelder Bibliotheks- und Informationswissenschaft sowie verwandte Anwendungsfelder besteht über das Open-Access-Archiv E-LIS (http://eprints.rclis.org/) die Möglichkeit, Publikationen und Forschungsergebnisse schnell und kostenfrei weltweit verfügbar zu machen. Das Ziel von E-LIS ist es, die Kommunikation innerhalb der Community zu fördern und für eine rasche Verbreitung von Forschungsergebnissen zu sorgen. E-LIS hält sich an die Ziele des Eprint Movement und des Free Scholarship Movement. Das Archiv wird durch "Selbst-Archivierung" aufgebaut, d.h. jede/r Autor/in kann seine Texte selbst ins System einstellen. Bisher sind bereits über 1.000 Publikationen verfügbar, der tägliche Zuwachs kann sich sehen lassen. Allerdings sind bisher so gut wie keine Texte aus dem deutschsprachigen Raum vorhanden. Wir möchten daher alle Autoren wissenschaftlicher Texte aus dem LIS-Bereich aufrufen, ihre E-Prints in E-LIS verfügbar zu machen. Die Vorteile liegen auf der Hand: - Die Texte werden dauerhaft elektronisch verfügbar gemacht. - Es besteht ein einheitlicher und leichter Zugriff auf die Texte. - Die elektronische Verfügbarkeit erhöht die Verbreitung und damit die Wirkung der Forschungsarbeiten. Um einen Text in das System einzustellen, müssen Sie sich einmalig auf der Website anmelden (http://eprints.rclis.org/perl/register) und können dann direkt loslegen. E-LIS basiert allein auf ehrenamtlicher Arbeit und verfolgt keine kommerziellen Ziele. Für Fragen des Copyrights wurde eine eigene Seite eingerichtet (http://eprints.rclis.org/copyright.html), ebenso zur Submission Policy (http://eprints.rclis.org/policy.html)."
  2. Lewandowski, D.: Perspektiven eines Open Web Index (2016) 0.02 
    0.01825319 = product of:
  0.07301276 = sum of:
    0.07301276 = weight(_text_:open in 2935) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.07301276 = score(doc=2935,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.20964009 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.5032015 = idf(docFreq=1330, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046553567 = queryNorm
        0.3482767 = fieldWeight in 2935, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          4.5032015 = idf(docFreq=1330, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=2935)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)
  3. Lewandowski, D.: ¬Die Informationswissenschaft hat ein strukturelles, kein inhaltliches Problem : Ein Sechs-Punkte-Programm, um aus dem Status eines kleinen Faches herauszukommen (2019) 0.02 
    0.018065974 = product of:
  0.0722639 = sum of:
    0.0722639 = weight(_text_:open in 5666) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0722639 = score(doc=5666,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.20964009 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.5032015 = idf(docFreq=1330, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046553567 = queryNorm
        0.34470457 = fieldWeight in 5666, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          4.5032015 = idf(docFreq=1330, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=5666)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)
    Content
    Vgl. auch die Stellungnahme von W. Bredemeier in: Open Password. Nr.676 vom 10.12.2019 u.d.T.: Fehlende Theorie und fehlender Bezugsrahmen auch bei "Human Recorded Information": Fahrlässige Aufgabe des einzigen Alleinstellungsmerkmals, den die Disziplin von vornherein hatte, Die Informationswissenschaft als Hügellandschaft mit "Stand-alone-USPs" [https://www.password-online.de/?wysija-page=1&controller=email&action=view&email_id=833&wysijap=subscriptions&user_id=1045]. Vgl. auch den Bericht über die Berliner Tagung von Stefan Hauff-Hartwig in: Bibliotheksdienst 54(2020) H.1, S.27- . Vgl. auch die Erwiderung: Jörs, B.: Wider eine Überschätzung der gegenwärtigen Leistungen der deutschsprachigen Informationswissenschaft: Keine fehlende Fundierung? Doch mit gesellschaftlicher Relevanz ausgestattet?. Bernd Jörs antwortet Dirk Lewandowski. In: Open Password. Nr. 691 vom 21.01.2020, [https://www.password- online.de/?mailpoet_router&endpoint=view_in_browser&action=view&data=WzksMCw2MjY0LCIxMjF0dWVibnVuczBra2dnY2d3d2c0ODB3ODgwazRzYyIsOCwwXQ].
    Source
    Open Password. 2019, Nr. 664 vom 19. November 2019. [https://www.password-online.de/?wysija-page=1&controller=email&action=view&email_id=822&wysijap=subscriptions&user_id=1045]
  4. Lewandowski, D.: Suchmaschinen verstehen : 3. vollständig überarbeitete und erweiterte Aufl. (2021) 0.01 
    0.013037993 = product of:
  0.05215197 = sum of:
    0.05215197 = weight(_text_:open in 4016) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.05215197 = score(doc=4016,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.20964009 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.5032015 = idf(docFreq=1330, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046553567 = queryNorm
        0.24876907 = fieldWeight in 4016, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          4.5032015 = idf(docFreq=1330, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4016)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)
    Content
    Vgl. die Anzeige in Open Password Nr.959 vom 11.08.2021: Einer der wenigen "Bestseller" der Informationsbranche, der nunmehr in die dritte Auflage geht. Das Buch wurde in Details überarbeitet sowie aktualisiert. Dazu wurden die Literaturangaben "vielfach erheblich" ergänzt. Dazu der Verfasser Dirk Lewandowski in seinem Vorwort: "Ich habe aber darauf geachtet, dass dieses Buch nicht das Schicksal vieler einführender Werke widerfährt, nämlich, dass es immer weiter anwächst, letztlich aber keine gut lesbare Einführung mehr darstellt." Veränderungen ergaben sich zum Teil, weil "ich durch die vielen Rückmeldungen auch zahlreiche Hinweise bekommen (habe), welche Teile noch verständlicher gemacht werden sollten, wo ergänzt, und wo gestrichen werden sollte."
  5. Lewandowski, D.: Alles nur noch Google? : Entwicklungen im Bereich der WWW-Suchmaschinen (2002) 0.01 
    0.006307366 = product of:
  0.025229463 = sum of:
    0.025229463 = product of:
      0.050458927 = sum of:
        0.050458927 = weight(_text_:22 in 997) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.050458927 = score(doc=997,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.16302267 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046553567 = queryNorm
            0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 997, 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=997)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)
    Date
    29. 9.2002 18:49:22
  6. Lewandowski, D.: Abfragesprachen und erweiterte Funktionen von WWW-Suchmaschinen (2004) 0.01 
    0.006307366 = product of:
  0.025229463 = sum of:
    0.025229463 = product of:
      0.050458927 = sum of:
        0.050458927 = weight(_text_:22 in 2314) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.050458927 = score(doc=2314,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.16302267 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046553567 = queryNorm
            0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 2314, 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=2314)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)
    Date
    28.11.2004 13:11:22
  7. Lewandowski, D.: Query understanding (2011) 0.01 
    0.006307366 = product of:
  0.025229463 = sum of:
    0.025229463 = product of:
      0.050458927 = sum of:
        0.050458927 = weight(_text_:22 in 344) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.050458927 = score(doc=344,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.16302267 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046553567 = queryNorm
            0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 344, 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=344)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)
    Date
    18. 9.2018 18:22:18
  8. Lewandowski, D.: ¬Die Macht der Suchmaschinen und ihr Einfluss auf unsere Entscheidungen (2014) 0.00 
    0.0047305245 = product of:
  0.018922098 = sum of:
    0.018922098 = product of:
      0.037844196 = sum of:
        0.037844196 = weight(_text_:22 in 1491) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.037844196 = score(doc=1491,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.16302267 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046553567 = queryNorm
            0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 1491, 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=1491)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)
    Date
    22. 9.2014 18:54:11
  9. Lewandowski, D.; Spree, U.: Ranking of Wikipedia articles in search engines revisited : fair ranking for reasonable quality? (2011) 0.00 
    0.0039421036 = product of:
  0.015768414 = sum of:
    0.015768414 = product of:
      0.03153683 = sum of:
        0.03153683 = weight(_text_:22 in 444) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.03153683 = score(doc=444,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.16302267 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046553567 = queryNorm
            0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 444, 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=444)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)
    Date
    30. 9.2012 19:27:22
  10. Lewandowski, D.; Sünkler, S.: What does Google recommend when you want to compare insurance offerings? (2019) 0.00 
    0.0039421036 = product of:
  0.015768414 = sum of:
    0.015768414 = product of:
      0.03153683 = sum of:
        0.03153683 = weight(_text_:22 in 5288) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.03153683 = score(doc=5288,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.16302267 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046553567 = queryNorm
            0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 5288, 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=5288)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)
    Date
    20. 1.2015 18:30:22
  11. Lewandowski, D.: How can library materials be ranked in the OPAC? (2009) 0.00 
    0.003693098 = product of:
  0.014772392 = sum of:
    0.014772392 = product of:
      0.029544784 = sum of:
        0.029544784 = weight(_text_:access in 2810) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.029544784 = score(doc=2810,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.15778996 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.389428 = idf(docFreq=4053, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046553567 = queryNorm
            0.18724121 = fieldWeight in 2810, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.389428 = idf(docFreq=4053, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2810)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)
    Abstract
    Some Online Public Access Catalogues offer a ranking component. However, ranking there is merely text-based and is doomed to fail due to limited text in bibliographic data. The main assumption for the talk is that we are in a situation where the appropriate ranking factors for OPACs should be defined, while the implementation is no major problem. We must define what we want, and not so much focus on the technical work. Some deep thinking is necessary on the "perfect results set" and how we can achieve it through ranking. The talk presents a set of potential ranking factors and clustering possibilities for further discussion. A look at commercial Web search engines could provide us with ideas how ranking can be improved with additional factors. Search engines are way beyond pure text-based ranking and apply ranking factors in the groups like popularity, freshness, personalisation, etc. The talk describes the main factors used in search engines and how derivatives of these could be used for libraries' purposes. The goal of ranking is to provide the user with the best-suitable results on top of the results list. How can this goal be achieved with the library catalogue and also concerning the library's different collections and databases? The assumption is that ranking of such materials is a complex problem and is yet nowhere near solved. Libraries should focus on ranking to improve user experience.
  12. Behnert, C.; Lewandowski, D.: ¬A framework for designing retrieval effectiveness studies of library information systems using human relevance assessments (2017) 0.00 
    0.003693098 = product of:
  0.014772392 = sum of:
    0.014772392 = product of:
      0.029544784 = sum of:
        0.029544784 = weight(_text_:access in 3700) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.029544784 = score(doc=3700,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.15778996 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.389428 = idf(docFreq=4053, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046553567 = queryNorm
            0.18724121 = fieldWeight in 3700, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.389428 = idf(docFreq=4053, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3700)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)
    Abstract
    Purpose This paper demonstrates how to apply traditional information retrieval evaluation methods based on standards from the Text REtrieval Conference (TREC) and web search evaluation to all types of modern library information systems including online public access catalogs, discovery systems, and digital libraries that provide web search features to gather information from heterogeneous sources. Design/methodology/approach We apply conventional procedures from information retrieval evaluation to the library information system context considering the specific characteristics of modern library materials. Findings We introduce a framework consisting of five parts: (1) search queries, (2) search results, (3) assessors, (4) testing, and (5) data analysis. We show how to deal with comparability problems resulting from diverse document types, e.g., electronic articles vs. printed monographs and what issues need to be considered for retrieval tests in the library context. Practical implications The framework can be used as a guideline for conducting retrieval effectiveness studies in the library context. Originality/value Although a considerable amount of research has been done on information retrieval evaluation, and standards for conducting retrieval effectiveness studies do exist, to our knowledge this is the first attempt to provide a systematic framework for evaluating the retrieval effectiveness of twenty-first-century library information systems. We demonstrate which issues must be considered and what decisions must be made by researchers prior to a retrieval test.

Authors

Years

Languages

Types

Themes

Subjects