Search (9 results, page 1 of 1)

  • × author_ss:"Hudon, M."
  • × year_i:[2000 TO 2010}
  1. Hudon, M.: Expanding audiences for education-related information and resources : classificatory structures (2003) 0.03
    0.031081367 = product of:
      0.10878478 = sum of:
        0.03856498 = weight(_text_:wide in 5521) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.03856498 = score(doc=5521,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.1312982 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.4307585 = idf(docFreq=1430, maxDocs=44218)
              0.029633347 = queryNorm
            0.29372054 = fieldWeight in 5521, 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=5521)
        0.036238287 = weight(_text_:web in 5521) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.036238287 = score(doc=5521,freq=6.0), product of:
            0.09670874 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
              0.029633347 = queryNorm
            0.37471575 = fieldWeight in 5521, product of:
              2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
                6.0 = termFreq=6.0
              3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=5521)
        0.00856136 = weight(_text_:information in 5521) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.00856136 = score(doc=5521,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.052020688 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.029633347 = queryNorm
            0.16457605 = fieldWeight in 5521, 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=5521)
        0.025420163 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 5521) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.025420163 = score(doc=5521,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.08963835 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
              0.029633347 = queryNorm
            0.2835858 = fieldWeight in 5521, 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=5521)
      0.2857143 = coord(4/14)
    
    Abstract
    Education is a culturally and politically branded domain of knowledge and practice, and education specialists have traditionally remained somewhat isolated, communicating mainly on the general level of "basic educational principles." The expansion of the World Wide Web could change this situation; there exist on the Web a substantial number of education-related resources which have become accessible to international audiences. In this paper, the authors look at how these resources are organized with a view to answering two questions: (1) In a context of global exchanges, are education-related resources available on the Web organized in such a way as to maximize efficiency of identification and retrieval? (2) In virtual libraries with specialized collections on education, do categorization schemes and terminology reflect anything other than local perspectives and systems?
    Content
    Beitrag eines Themenheftes "Knowledge organization and classification in international information retrieval"
  2. Hudon, M.: Subject access to Web resources in education (2003) 0.02
    0.01603559 = product of:
      0.07483275 = sum of:
        0.039451245 = weight(_text_:web in 3958) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.039451245 = score(doc=3958,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.09670874 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
              0.029633347 = queryNorm
            0.4079388 = fieldWeight in 3958, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=3958)
        0.011415146 = weight(_text_:information in 3958) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.011415146 = score(doc=3958,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.052020688 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.029633347 = queryNorm
            0.21943474 = fieldWeight in 3958, 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=3958)
        0.023966359 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 3958) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.023966359 = score(doc=3958,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.08963835 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
              0.029633347 = queryNorm
            0.26736724 = fieldWeight in 3958, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=3958)
      0.21428572 = coord(3/14)
    
    Abstract
    Introduction to various classificatory structures currently used to organize and make collections of Web-based resources in education more accessible to educators, education specialists, and the general public. Presentation of other models which could also be useful.
    Source
    Subject retrieval in a networked environment: Proceedings of the IFLA Satellite Meeting held in Dublin, OH, 14-16 August 2001 and sponsored by the IFLA Classification and Indexing Section, the IFLA Information Technology Section and OCLC. Ed.: I.C. McIlwaine
    Theme
    Information Gateway
  3. Hudon, M.: Innovation and tradition in knowledge organization schemes on the Internet, or, Finding one's way in the virtual library (2000) 0.01
    0.0050917473 = product of:
      0.03564223 = sum of:
        0.029588435 = weight(_text_:web in 116) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.029588435 = score(doc=116,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.09670874 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
              0.029633347 = queryNorm
            0.3059541 = fieldWeight in 116, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=116)
        0.0060537956 = weight(_text_:information in 116) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.0060537956 = score(doc=116,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.052020688 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.029633347 = queryNorm
            0.116372846 = fieldWeight in 116, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=116)
      0.14285715 = coord(2/14)
    
    Abstract
    Because of the nature, number, and extreme mobility of resources available on electronic networks, access instruments that will allow information seekers to find relevant Web pages or sites are essential. While virtual libraries without clear collection development policies continue to be established, ad hoc knowledge organization schemes also continue to be conceived and implemented; these so-called innovative classification tools are generally structured around loose categories representing a mix of disciplines, subjects, forms of presentation, and audiences. This paper discusses a few examples of Web-based organization schemes, suggesting that their degree of intuitiveness, user-friendliness and efficiency is very possibly overrated
  4. Hudon, M.; Mas, E.S.: Structure, logic, and semantics for Web-based collections in education (2006) 0.01
    0.0050917473 = product of:
      0.03564223 = sum of:
        0.029588435 = weight(_text_:web in 4391) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.029588435 = score(doc=4391,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.09670874 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
              0.029633347 = queryNorm
            0.3059541 = fieldWeight in 4391, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4391)
        0.0060537956 = weight(_text_:information in 4391) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.0060537956 = score(doc=4391,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.052020688 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.029633347 = queryNorm
            0.116372846 = fieldWeight in 4391, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4391)
      0.14285715 = coord(2/14)
    
    Abstract
    Results of a project focusing on six Web-based collections in education. Our analysis of homegrown classification structures considers three dimensions. "Structure" is described through quantitative data (e.g. Number of main categories, Number of hierarchical levels, etc.). "Logic" concentrates on two aspects of the subdividing process: division principle, and type of hierarchical relation. "Semantics" relates to concepts and their representation in the form of terms. In our sample, the classification structures are hierarchical, not overly complex and not very specific. The choice, arrangement and sequence of classes are logical. Conceptual and terminological inconsistencies are due to significant gaps in conceptual coverage and lack of terminological control.
    Theme
    Information Gateway
  5. Hudon, M.; Turner, J.M.; Devin, Y.: How many terms are enough? : stability and dynamism in vocabulary management for moving image collections (2000) 0.00
    0.0040454194 = product of:
      0.028317936 = sum of:
        0.0071344664 = weight(_text_:information in 117) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.0071344664 = score(doc=117,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.052020688 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.029633347 = queryNorm
            0.13714671 = fieldWeight in 117, 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=117)
        0.021183468 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 117) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.021183468 = score(doc=117,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.08963835 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
              0.029633347 = queryNorm
            0.23632148 = fieldWeight in 117, 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=117)
      0.14285715 = coord(2/14)
    
    Abstract
    Most moving image collections have existed for less than a century, and as we enter the new millennium we observe that the organisation of these collections is still characterized by ad hoc practices. An important stream of research in this area focuses on high-level access to images using methods from library and information science, and using text to create information useful for retrieval. It has been established that common names for objects seen in the image are the key to retrieval in such collections. On a day-to-day basis, those responsible for collection management build indexing vocabularies, creating terms as necessary, and often structuring them loosely into a thesaurus. Discussions with moving image collection librarians have led us to believe that there may be an optimal number of common names a thesaurus for managing general collections of moving images should contain, and that the terms may even be the same from one thesaurus to the next. In this paper, we describe the methodology adopted for studying this question, and report preliminary results
  6. Hudon, M.: True and tested products : thesauri on the Web (2003) 0.00
    0.0034870307 = product of:
      0.048818428 = sum of:
        0.048818428 = weight(_text_:web in 746) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.048818428 = score(doc=746,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.09670874 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
              0.029633347 = queryNorm
            0.50479853 = fieldWeight in 746, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
              0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=746)
      0.071428575 = coord(1/14)
    
  7. Green, R.; Bean, C.A.; Hudon, M.: Universality and basic level concepts (2003) 0.00
    8.5594144E-4 = product of:
      0.0119831795 = sum of:
        0.0119831795 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 2730) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.0119831795 = score(doc=2730,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.08963835 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
              0.029633347 = queryNorm
            0.13368362 = fieldWeight in 2730, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=2730)
      0.071428575 = coord(1/14)
    
    Abstract
    This paper examines whether a concept's hierarchical level affects the likelihood of its universality across schemes for knowledge representation and knowledge organization. Empirical data an equivalents are drawn from a bilingual thesaurus, a pair of biomedical vocabularies, and two ontologies. Conceptual equivalence across resources occurs significantly more often at the basic level than at subordinate or superordinate levels. Attempts to integrate knowledge representation or knowledge organization tools should concentrate an establishing equivalences at the basic level. 1. Rationale The degree of success attainable in the integration of multiple knowledge representation systems or knowledge organization schemes is constrained by limitations an the universality of human conceptual systems. For example, human languages do not all lexicalize the same set of concepts; nor do they structure (quasi-)equivalent concepts in the same relational patterns (Riesthuis, 2001). As a consequence, even multilingual thesauri designed from the outset from the perspective of multiple languages may routinely include situations where corresponding terms are not truly equivalent (Hudon, 1997, 2001). Intuitively, where inexactness and partialness in equivalence mappings across knowledge representation schemes and knowledge organizations schemes exist, a more difficult retrieval scenario arises than where equivalence mappings reflect full and exact conceptual matches. The question we address in this paper is whether a concept's hierarchical level af ects the likelihood of its universality/full equivalence across schemes for knowledge representation and knowledge organization. Cognitive science research has shown that one particular hierarchical level-called the basic level--enjoys a privileged status (Brown, 1958; Rosch et al., 1976). Our underlying hypothesis is that concepts at the basic level (e.g., apple, shoe, chair) are more likely to match across knowledge representation schemes and knowledge organization schemes than concepts at the superordinate (e.g., fruit, footwear, furniture) or subordinate (e.g., Granny Smith, sneaker, recliner) levels. This hypothesis is consistent with ethnobiological data showing that folk classifications of flora are more likely to agree at the basic level than at superordinate or subordinate levels (Berlin, 1992).
  8. Hudon, M.: Relationships in multilingual thesauri (2001) 0.00
    6.115257E-4 = product of:
      0.00856136 = sum of:
        0.00856136 = weight(_text_:information in 1147) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.00856136 = score(doc=1147,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.052020688 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.029633347 = queryNorm
            0.16457605 = fieldWeight in 1147, 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=1147)
      0.071428575 = coord(1/14)
    
    Abstract
    Because the multilingual thesaurus has a critical role to play in the global networked information world, its relational structure must come under close scrutiny. Traditionally, identity of relational structures has been sought for the different language versions of a multilingual thesaurus, often leading to the artificialization of all target languages. The various types of cross-lingual and intralingual relations found in thesauri are examined in the context of two questions: Are all types of thesaural relations transferable from one language to another? and Are the two members of a valid relation in a source language always the same in the target language(s)? Two options for resolving semantic conflicts in multilingual thesauri are presented.
    Series
    Information science and knowledge management; vol.2
  9. Hudon, M.: Conceptual compatibility in controlled language tools used to index and access the content of moving image collections (2004) 0.00
    4.32414E-4 = product of:
      0.0060537956 = sum of:
        0.0060537956 = weight(_text_:information in 2655) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.0060537956 = score(doc=2655,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.052020688 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.029633347 = queryNorm
            0.116372846 = fieldWeight in 2655, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2655)
      0.071428575 = coord(1/14)
    
    Source
    Knowledge organization and the global information society: Proceedings of the 8th International ISKO Conference 13-16 July 2004, London, UK. Ed.: I.C. McIlwaine