Search (151 results, page 1 of 8)

  • × theme_ss:"Katalogfragen allgemein"
  1. Stoker, D.: Computer cataloguing in retrospect (1997) 0.03 
    0.033862952 = product of:
  0.067725904 = sum of:
    0.011453216 = weight(_text_:information in 605) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.011453216 = score(doc=605,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.08351069 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.047571484 = queryNorm
        0.13714671 = fieldWeight in 605, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=605)
    0.05627269 = sum of:
      0.02404629 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 605) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.02404629 = score(doc=605,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.1438997 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
            0.047571484 = queryNorm
          0.16710453 = fieldWeight in 605, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=605)
      0.0322264 = weight(_text_:22 in 605) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.0322264 = score(doc=605,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.16658723 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.047571484 = queryNorm
          0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 605, 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=605)
  0.5 = coord(2/4)
    Abstract
    Pays tribute to the recent advances in the ability to access computerized catalogues from the desktop via the Internet but emphasizes that there are problems still to be overcome before the ideal of universal access to catalogue records for UK libraries is achieved. Advances in computerized cataloguing over the past 40 years have been an obstacle to retrospective cataloguing in a coherent and standardized manner which even the adoption of common standards for information retrieval and the Z39.50 protocol have failed to prevent. Many libraries with modern methods for cataloguing new materials still have earlier sequences of records on microfiche or other hard copy format. Other specialized collections are such that they have never been catalogued to professional standards or in a convenient format. Illustrates the point with reference to practical searching of catalogues in Aberystwyth, Wales, and to 2 studies of the logistical and financial issues of a programme of retrospective cataloguing as reported in BLRIC report 53. Discusses the proposed UK coordinating body and coordinated natioanl prgramme, to select which catalogues should be converted, set priorities for work, ensure maintenance of requisite standards, and arrange collaboration between neighbouring or related institutions
    Date
    9. 2.1997 18:44:22
    Source
    Journal of librarianship and information science. 29(1997) no.4, S.175-177
  2. Smiraglia, R.P.: Works as signs, symbols,and canons : The epistemology of the work (2001) 0.03 
    0.025849119 = product of:
  0.051698238 = sum of:
    0.019436752 = weight(_text_:information in 1119) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.019436752 = score(doc=1119,freq=8.0), product of:
        0.08351069 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.047571484 = queryNorm
        0.23274569 = fieldWeight in 1119, product of:
          2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
            8.0 = termFreq=8.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1119)
    0.032261483 = product of:
      0.06452297 = sum of:
        0.06452297 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 1119) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.06452297 = score(doc=1119,freq=10.0), product of:
            0.1438997 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
              0.047571484 = queryNorm
            0.44838852 = fieldWeight in 1119, product of:
              3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
                10.0 = termFreq=10.0
              3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1119)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(2/4)
    Abstract
    Works are key entities in the universe of recorded knowledge. Works are those deliberate creations (known variously as opera, oeuvres, Werke, etc.) that constitute individual sets of created conceptions that stand as the formal records of knowledge. In the information retrieval domain, the work as opposed to the document, has only recently received focused attention. In this paper, the definition of the work as an entity for information retrieval is examined. A taxonomic definition (that is, a definition built around a taxonomy) is presented. An epistemological perspective aids in understanding the components of the taxonomic definition. Works, thus defined as entities for information retrieval, are seen to constitute sets of varying instantiations of abstract creations. These variant instantiations must be explicitly identified in future systems for documentary information retrieval. An expanded perception of works, such as that presented in this paper, helps us understand the variety of ways in which mechanisms for their control and retrieval might better be shaped in future.
  3. Cochrane, P.A.: 34th UIUC clinic highlights visualizing subject access (1997) 0.03 
    0.025351023 = product of:
  0.050702047 = sum of:
    0.025712406 = weight(_text_:information in 377) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.025712406 = score(doc=377,freq=14.0), product of:
        0.08351069 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.047571484 = queryNorm
        0.3078936 = fieldWeight in 377, product of:
          3.7416575 = tf(freq=14.0), with freq of:
            14.0 = termFreq=14.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=377)
    0.02498964 = product of:
      0.04997928 = sum of:
        0.04997928 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 377) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.04997928 = score(doc=377,freq=6.0), product of:
            0.1438997 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
              0.047571484 = queryNorm
            0.34732026 = fieldWeight in 377, product of:
              2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
                6.0 = termFreq=6.0
              3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=377)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(2/4)
    Abstract
    Reports on the 34th Annual Clinic on Library Applications of Data Processing, held 2-4 Mar 1997 at the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign. The clinic was entitled 'Visualizing subject access for 21st century information resources'. Summarizes the following individual sessions: Visual browsing for information retrieval; Hypostatizing data collections, especially bibliographic; Simultaneous searching of distributed information and subject repositories on the WWW; Information filtering from multiple sources; Thesauri in the full text world; The role of controlled vocabulary in visualizing document associations; Rutgers' investigations of interactive information retrieval; Spatial abilities and visualizations; Using IODyne as an indexing tool; Knowledge structures for information visualizing; Visualizing digital libraries; what role for the OPAC?; How will we provide subject access in the Interspace of the 21st century?; Natural language processing based information retrieval; Building and accessing vocabulary resources for networked resource discovery and navigation; Using electronic services to become an interbetworked business; and Conference Wrap up
  4. Arsenault, C.; Ménard, E.: Searching titles with initial articles in library catalogs : a case study and search behavior analysis (2007) 0.02 
    0.024095694 = product of:
  0.096382774 = sum of:
    0.096382774 = sum of:
      0.0577111 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 2264) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.0577111 = score(doc=2264,freq=8.0), product of:
          0.1438997 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
            0.047571484 = queryNorm
          0.40105087 = fieldWeight in 2264, product of:
            2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
              8.0 = termFreq=8.0
            3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
            0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2264)
      0.038671676 = weight(_text_:22 in 2264) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.038671676 = score(doc=2264,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.16658723 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.047571484 = queryNorm
          0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 2264, 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=2264)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)
    Abstract
    This study examines problems caused by initial articles in library catalogs. The problematic records observed are those whose titles begin with a word erroneously considered to be an article at the retrieval stage. Many retrieval algorithms edit queries by removing initial words corresponding to articles found in an exclusion list even whether the initial word is an article or not. Consequently, a certain number of documents remain more difficult to find. The study also examines user behavior during known-item retrieval using the title index in library catalogs, concentrating on the problems caused by the presence of an initial article or of a word homograph to an article. Measures of success and effectiveness are taken to determine if retrieval is affected in such cases.
    Date
    10. 9.2000 17:38:22
  5. Bergman, O.; Gradovitch, N.; Bar-Ilan, J.; Beyth-Marom, R.: Folder versus tag preference in personal information management (2013) 0.02 
    0.024016928 = product of:
  0.048033856 = sum of:
    0.01402727 = weight(_text_:information in 1103) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.01402727 = score(doc=1103,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.08351069 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.047571484 = queryNorm
        0.16796975 = fieldWeight in 1103, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1103)
    0.03400659 = product of:
      0.06801318 = sum of:
        0.06801318 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 1103) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.06801318 = score(doc=1103,freq=16.0), product of:
            0.1438997 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
              0.047571484 = queryNorm
            0.47264296 = fieldWeight in 1103, product of:
              4.0 = tf(freq=16.0), with freq of:
                16.0 = termFreq=16.0
              3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1103)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(2/4)
    Abstract
    Users' preferences for folders versus tags was studied in 2 working environments where both options were available to them. In the Gmail study, we informed 75 participants about both folder-labeling and tag-labeling, observed their storage behavior after 1 month, and asked them to estimate the proportions of different retrieval options in their behavior. In the Windows 7 study, we informed 23 participants about tags and asked them to tag all their files for 2 weeks, followed by a period of 5 weeks of free choice between the 2 methods. Their storage and retrieval habits were tested prior to the learning session and, after 7 weeks, using special classification recording software and a retrieval-habits questionnaire. A controlled retrieval task and an in-depth interview were conducted. Results of both studies show a strong preference for folders over tags for both storage and retrieval. In the minority of cases where tags were used for storage, participants typically used a single tag per information item. Moreover, when multiple classification was used for storage, it was only marginally used for retrieval. The controlled retrieval task showed lower success rates and slower retrieval speeds for tag use. Possible reasons for participants' preferences are discussed.
    Source
    Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 64(2013) no.10, S.1995-2012
  6. Bowman, J.H.: ¬The catalog as barrier to retrieval : Part 1: hyphens and ampersands in titles (2000) 0.02 
    0.023181545 = product of:
  0.09272618 = sum of:
    0.09272618 = sum of:
      0.047609225 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 5365) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.047609225 = score(doc=5365,freq=4.0), product of:
          0.1438997 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
            0.047571484 = queryNorm
          0.33085006 = fieldWeight in 5365, product of:
            2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
              4.0 = termFreq=4.0
            3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=5365)
      0.045116954 = weight(_text_:22 in 5365) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.045116954 = score(doc=5365,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.16658723 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.047571484 = queryNorm
          0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 5365, 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=5365)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)
    Abstract
    An Internet survey of 38 different OPAC systems, at eighty different libraries, was undertaken to investigate the effect on retrieval of the presence of the hyphen or the ampersand in titles. Title and Keyword searches were performed. In Title search, 22 of the systems treat the hyphen as equivalent to a space, while in Keyword the number is 16. The other systems treat it in various different ways (even including the equivalent of NOT), which means that results of searching multiple catalogs are very inconsistent. The ampersand may be ignored, treated as a special character, or treated as "and," again with very inconsistent results. Various recommendations are made with a view to improving consistency of performance.
  7. LeBlanc, J.; Kurth, M.: ¬An operational model for library metadata maintenance (2008) 0.02 
    0.022088865 = product of:
  0.04417773 = sum of:
    0.016832722 = weight(_text_:information in 101) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.016832722 = score(doc=101,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.08351069 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.047571484 = queryNorm
        0.20156369 = fieldWeight in 101, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=101)
    0.027345007 = product of:
      0.054690015 = sum of:
        0.054690015 = weight(_text_:22 in 101) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.054690015 = score(doc=101,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.16658723 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.047571484 = queryNorm
            0.32829654 = fieldWeight in 101, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=101)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(2/4)
    Abstract
    Libraries pay considerable attention to the creation, preservation, and transformation of descriptive metadata in both MARC and non-MARC formats. Little evidence suggests that they devote as much time, energy, and financial resources to the ongoing maintenance of non-MARC metadata, especially with regard to updating and editing existing descriptive content, as they do to maintenance of such information in the MARC-based online public access catalog. In this paper, the authors introduce a model, derived loosely from J. A. Zachman's framework for information systems architecture, with which libraries can identify and inventory components of catalog or metadata maintenance and plan interdepartmental, even interinstitutional, workflows. The model draws on the notion that the expertise and skills that have long been the hallmark for the maintenance of libraries' catalog data can and should be parlayed towards metadata maintenance in a broader set of information delivery systems.
    Date
    10. 9.2000 17:38:22
    19. 6.2010 19:22:28
  8. Miksa, S.D.: ¬The challenges of change : a review of cataloging and classification literature, 2003-2004 (2007) 0.02 
    0.022053132 = product of:
  0.044106264 = sum of:
    0.018325146 = weight(_text_:information in 266) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.018325146 = score(doc=266,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.08351069 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.047571484 = queryNorm
        0.21943474 = fieldWeight in 266, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=266)
    0.025781117 = product of:
      0.051562235 = sum of:
        0.051562235 = weight(_text_:22 in 266) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.051562235 = score(doc=266,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.16658723 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.047571484 = queryNorm
            0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 266, 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=266)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(2/4)
    Abstract
    This paper reviews the enormous changes in cataloging and classification reflected in the literature of 2003 and 2004, and discusses major themes and issues. Traditional cataloging and classification tools have been re-vamped and new resources have emerged. Most notable themes are: the continuing influence of the Functional Requirements for Bibliographic Control (FRBR); the struggle to understand the ever-broadening concept of an "information entity"; steady developments in metadata-encoding standards; and the globalization of information systems, including multilinguistic challenges.
    Date
    10. 9.2000 17:38:22
  9. Bates, M.J.: Speculations on browsing, directed searching, and linking in relation to the Bradford distribution (2002) 0.02 
    0.020533394 = product of:
  0.041066788 = sum of:
    0.021730952 = weight(_text_:information in 54) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.021730952 = score(doc=54,freq=10.0), product of:
        0.08351069 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.047571484 = queryNorm
        0.2602176 = fieldWeight in 54, product of:
          3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
            10.0 = termFreq=10.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=54)
    0.019335838 = product of:
      0.038671676 = sum of:
        0.038671676 = weight(_text_:22 in 54) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.038671676 = score(doc=54,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.16658723 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.047571484 = queryNorm
            0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 54, 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=54)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(2/4)
    Abstract
    Extensive literatures exist on information searching theory and techniques, as well as on the Bradford Distribution. This distribution, also known as "Bradford's Law of Scattering," tells us that information on a subject is dispersed in a characteristic and robust pattern that appears consistently across many different environments. This pattern may be expected to have important implications for information searching theory and techniques. Yet these two research literatures are rarely considered in relation to each other. It is the purpose of this article to distinguish three Bradford regions and speculate on the optimum searching techniques for each region. In the process, browsing, directed searching in databases, and the pursuit of various forms of links will all be considered. Implications of growth in size of a literature for optimal information organization and searching will also be addressed.
    Date
    22. 2.2007 18:56:23
    Source
    Emerging frameworks and methods: Proceedings of the Fourth International Conference on the Conceptions of Library and Information Science (CoLIS4), Seattle, WA, July 21 - 25, 2002. Eds.: Fidel, R., H. Bruce, P. Ingwersen u. P. Vakkari
  10. Hedman, T.: Utkast till en deskriptiv teori for katalogsokning / informationsatervinning (1997) 0.02 
    0.01975431 = product of:
  0.03950862 = sum of:
    0.022676213 = weight(_text_:information in 1428) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.022676213 = score(doc=1428,freq=8.0), product of:
        0.08351069 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.047571484 = queryNorm
        0.27153665 = fieldWeight in 1428, product of:
          2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
            8.0 = termFreq=8.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=1428)
    0.016832404 = product of:
      0.033664808 = sum of:
        0.033664808 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 1428) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.033664808 = score(doc=1428,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.1438997 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
              0.047571484 = queryNorm
            0.23394634 = fieldWeight in 1428, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=1428)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(2/4)
    Abstract
    Library information searching lacks a descriptive theory which explains how a user decides to borrow one book and not another. Such theory should act as a reference framework against which cataloguing rules and the classification system can be measured, and should be based on 2 complementary perspectives, described in detail: modern classification theory, which explains what cataloguing and classification involve, and philosophy of science, which explains what happens when the user meets the catalogue record. Catalogue information must answer which work is described, and why this work on the subject is chosen. A descriptive theory is especially necessary for knowing what new information to add to the catalogue. Discusses this in a subsequent article
    Footnote
    Übers. d. Titels: Draft of a descriptive theory of catalogue searching / information retrieval
  11. Solis, A.Q.; Navarrete, O.A.: Medidas de calidad en la creacion de catalogos de bibliotecas (1998) 0.02 
    0.01969544 = product of:
  0.07878176 = sum of:
    0.07878176 = sum of:
      0.033664808 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 2825) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.033664808 = score(doc=2825,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.1438997 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
            0.047571484 = queryNorm
          0.23394634 = fieldWeight in 2825, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=2825)
      0.045116954 = weight(_text_:22 in 2825) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.045116954 = score(doc=2825,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.16658723 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.047571484 = queryNorm
          0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 2825, 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=2825)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)
    Abstract
    A discussion of the importance of clear cataloguing policies and routines as the basis of quality control, in relation to the methods used in the College of Mexico Library. The fundamental principle is to prevent errors occuring rather than to correct them subsequently. Indices of quality and effiency in relation to errors which do and do not affect retrieval, established through monthly review of samples of the work of each cataloguer, are used to monitor activities and ensure high standards. This process, essentially collaborative, promotes an overall culture of quality
    Date
    30. 1.1999 19:22:45
  12. Randall, N.B.: Spelling errors in the database : shadow or substance? (1999) 0.02 
    0.01969544 = product of:
  0.07878176 = sum of:
    0.07878176 = sum of:
      0.033664808 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 106) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.033664808 = score(doc=106,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.1438997 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
            0.047571484 = queryNorm
          0.23394634 = fieldWeight in 106, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=106)
      0.045116954 = weight(_text_:22 in 106) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.045116954 = score(doc=106,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.16658723 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.047571484 = queryNorm
          0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 106, 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=106)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)
    Abstract
    Describes the results of research to determine the extent of spelling errors in the State University of New York at Albany's online catalogue, whether these errors seriously affect users' access to library materials and what effect spelling errors will have on the group database planned for the State University of New York (SUNY). Using standard database tests, the catalogues of the four SUNY University Centers (Albany, Binghamton, Buffalo and Stony Brook) were studied. In addition, two comparison catalogues were studied: the New York State Library's Excelsior and California University's Melvyl. Results show that misspellings are unavoidable due to the way that most catalogues were built. These errors, however, are rarely an impediment to retrieval. Concludes with suggested ways to find and correct misspellings without expensive large scale efforts
    Date
    10. 9.2000 17:38:22
  13. White, R.W.: Interactions with search systems (2016) 0.02 
    0.01946691 = product of:
  0.03893382 = sum of:
    0.018109124 = weight(_text_:information in 3612) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.018109124 = score(doc=3612,freq=10.0), product of:
        0.08351069 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.047571484 = queryNorm
        0.21684799 = fieldWeight in 3612, product of:
          3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
            10.0 = termFreq=10.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3612)
    0.020824699 = product of:
      0.041649397 = sum of:
        0.041649397 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 3612) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.041649397 = score(doc=3612,freq=6.0), product of:
            0.1438997 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
              0.047571484 = queryNorm
            0.28943354 = fieldWeight in 3612, product of:
              2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
                6.0 = termFreq=6.0
              3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3612)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(2/4)
    Abstract
    Information seeking is a fundamental human activity. In the modern world, it is frequently conducted through interactions with search systems. The retrieval and comprehension of information returned by these systems is a key part of decision making and action in a broad range of settings. Advances in data availability coupled with new interaction paradigms, and mobile and cloud computing capabilities, have created a broad range of new opportunities for information access and use. In this comprehensive book for professionals, researchers, and students involved in search system design and evaluation, search expert Ryen White discusses how search systems can capitalize on new capabilities and how next-generation systems must support higher order search activities such as task completion, learning, and decision making. He outlines the implications of these changes for the evolution of search evaluation, as well as challenges that extend beyond search systems in areas such as privacy and societal benefit.
    RSWK
    Information Retrieval
    Subject
    Information Retrieval
  14. Budd, J.: Exploring categorization : undergraduate student searching and the evolution of catalogs (2007) 0.02 
    0.019369476 = product of:
  0.03873895 = sum of:
    0.012957836 = weight(_text_:information in 256) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.012957836 = score(doc=256,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.08351069 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.047571484 = queryNorm
        0.1551638 = fieldWeight in 256, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=256)
    0.025781117 = product of:
      0.051562235 = sum of:
        0.051562235 = weight(_text_:22 in 256) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.051562235 = score(doc=256,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.16658723 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.047571484 = queryNorm
            0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 256, 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=256)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(2/4)
    Abstract
    Debate about the future of library catalogs and cataloging has been, and continues to be, featured in the literature of librarianship. Some research into the ways undergraduate students at one institution assign subjects to selected works provides insight into the cognitive elements of categorization. The design of catalogs can be informed by this research, as well as work currently being done on alternative means of organization, such as information systems ontologies.
    Date
    10. 9.2000 17:38:22
  15. Morgan, E.L.: Possible solutions for incorporating digital information mediums into traditional library cataloging services (1996) 0.02 
    0.01929649 = product of:
  0.03859298 = sum of:
    0.016034503 = weight(_text_:information in 600) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.016034503 = score(doc=600,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.08351069 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.047571484 = queryNorm
        0.1920054 = fieldWeight in 600, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=600)
    0.022558477 = product of:
      0.045116954 = sum of:
        0.045116954 = weight(_text_:22 in 600) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.045116954 = score(doc=600,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.16658723 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.047571484 = queryNorm
            0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 600, 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=600)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(2/4)
    Abstract
    This article first compares and contrasts the essential, fundamental differences between traditional and digital information mediums. It then reexamines the role of the online public access catalog (OPAC), refines the definition of library's catalog, and advocates the addition of Internet resources within the OPAC. Next, the article describes the building of the Alex Catalog, a catalog of Internet resources in the in the form of MARC records. Finally, this article outlines a process of integrating the futher inclusion of other Internet resources into OPACs as well as some of the obstacles such a process manifests.
    Source
    Cataloging and classification quarterly. 22(1996) nos.3/4, S.143-170
  16. McMillan, G.: Electronic theses and dissertations : merging perspectives (1996) 0.02 
    0.01929649 = product of:
  0.03859298 = sum of:
    0.016034503 = weight(_text_:information in 601) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.016034503 = score(doc=601,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.08351069 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.047571484 = queryNorm
        0.1920054 = fieldWeight in 601, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=601)
    0.022558477 = product of:
      0.045116954 = sum of:
        0.045116954 = weight(_text_:22 in 601) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.045116954 = score(doc=601,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.16658723 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.047571484 = queryNorm
            0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 601, 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=601)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(2/4)
    Abstract
    Theses and dissertations as electronic files transferred from the student author to the Graduate School to the Library may well be the first major source of electronic texts that many libraries encounter. To prepare for this potential influx of electronic texts, an ad hoc task force considered work flow and cataloging guidelines. The author suggests expanding current theses cataloging and taking advantage of online information prepared by authors so that the bibliographic records provide OPACS with much more valuable information than does traditional theses cataloging. This should not require a lot of extra work.
    Source
    Cataloging and classification quarterly. 22(1996) nos.3/4, S.105-125
  17. Gödert, W.; Lepsky, K.: Semantische Umfeldsuche im Information Retrieval (1998) 0.02 
    0.01757136 = product of:
  0.03514272 = sum of:
    0.011338106 = weight(_text_:information in 606) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.011338106 = score(doc=606,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.08351069 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.047571484 = queryNorm
        0.13576832 = fieldWeight in 606, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=606)
    0.023804612 = product of:
      0.047609225 = sum of:
        0.047609225 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 606) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.047609225 = score(doc=606,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.1438997 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
              0.047571484 = queryNorm
            0.33085006 = fieldWeight in 606, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=606)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(2/4)
    Theme
    Semantisches Umfeld in Indexierung u. Retrieval
  18. Julien, C.-A.; Guastavino, C.; Bouthillier, F.: Capitalizing on information organization and information visualization for a new-generation catalogue (2012) 0.02 
    0.01755621 = product of:
  0.03511242 = sum of:
    0.018109124 = weight(_text_:information in 5567) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.018109124 = score(doc=5567,freq=10.0), product of:
        0.08351069 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.047571484 = queryNorm
        0.21684799 = fieldWeight in 5567, product of:
          3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
            10.0 = termFreq=10.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=5567)
    0.017003294 = product of:
      0.03400659 = sum of:
        0.03400659 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 5567) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.03400659 = score(doc=5567,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.1438997 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
              0.047571484 = queryNorm
            0.23632148 = fieldWeight in 5567, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=5567)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(2/4)
    Abstract
    Subject searching is difficult with traditional text-based online public access library catalogues (OPACs), and the next-generation discovery layers are keyword searching and result filtering tools that offer little support for subject browsing. Next-generation OPACs ignore the rich network of relations offered by controlled subject vocabulary, which can facilitate subject browsing. A new generation of OPACs could leverage existing information-organization investments and offer online searchers a novel browsing and searching environment. This is a case study of the design and development of a virtual reality subject browsing and information retrieval tool. The functional prototype shows that the Library of Congress subject headings (LCSH) can be shaped into a useful and usable tree structure serving as a visual metaphor that contains a real world collection from the domain of science and engineering. Formative tests show that users can effectively browse the LCSH tree and carve it up based on their keyword search queries. This study uses a complex information-organization structure as a defining characteristic of an OPAC that goes beyond the standard keyword search model, toward the cutting edge of online search tools.
    Theme
    Verbale Doksprachen im Online-Retrieval
  19. Whitney , C.; Schiff, L.: ¬The Melvyl Recommender Project : developing library recommendation services (2006) 0.02 
    0.017073907 = product of:
  0.034147814 = sum of:
    0.01374386 = weight(_text_:information in 1173) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.01374386 = score(doc=1173,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.08351069 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.047571484 = queryNorm
        0.16457605 = fieldWeight in 1173, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1173)
    0.020403953 = product of:
      0.040807907 = sum of:
        0.040807907 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 1173) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.040807907 = score(doc=1173,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.1438997 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
              0.047571484 = queryNorm
            0.2835858 = fieldWeight in 1173, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1173)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(2/4)
    Abstract
    Popular commercial on-line services such as Google, e-Bay, Amazon, and Netflix have evolved quickly over the last decade to help people find what they want, developing information retrieval strategies such as usefully ranked results, spelling correction, and recommender systems. Online library catalogs (OPACs), in contrast, have changed little and are notoriously difficult for patrons to use (University of California Libraries, 2005). Over the past year (June 2005 to the present), the Melvyl Recommender Project (California Digital Library, 2005) has been exploring methods and feasibility of closing the gap between features that library patrons want and have come to expect from information retrieval systems and what libraries are currently equipped to deliver. The project team conducted exploratory work in five topic areas: relevance ranking, auto-correction, use of a text-based discovery system, user interface strategies, and recommending. This article focuses specifically on the recommending portion of the project and potential extensions to that work.
  20. Hillmann, D.I.: 'Parallel universes' or meaningful relationships : envisioning a future for the OPAC and the net (1996) 0.02 
    0.016948292 = product of:
  0.033896584 = sum of:
    0.011338106 = weight(_text_:information in 3656) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.011338106 = score(doc=3656,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.08351069 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.047571484 = queryNorm
        0.13576832 = fieldWeight in 3656, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=3656)
    0.022558477 = product of:
      0.045116954 = sum of:
        0.045116954 = weight(_text_:22 in 3656) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.045116954 = score(doc=3656,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.16658723 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.047571484 = queryNorm
            0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 3656, 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=3656)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(2/4)
    Abstract
    Briefly follows the debate concerning: the relationship between traditional library OPACs and the WWW; possible replacement of USMARC format with SGML; and the possible demise of OPACs that do not migrate to the WWW. Discusses the approach taken by the Text encoding Initative (TEI) in their use of a mandatory TEI header in their standard SGML application as the first since CIP to explore attaching bibliographic information to the item itself to assist cataloguing
    Series
    Cataloging and classification quarterly; vol.22, nos.3/4

Authors

Years

Languages

  • e 114
  • d 27
  • f 3
  • sp 2
  • a 1
  • chi 1
  • i 1
  • More… Less…

Types

  • a 130
  • el 12
  • m 8
  • r 6
  • s 5
  • b 3
  • x 2
  • More… Less…

Themes

Subjects

Classifications