-
Green, R.: Relational aspects of subject authority control : the contributions of classificatory structure (2015)
0.00
0.0030368094 = product of:
0.023282206 = sum of:
0.008055268 = product of:
0.016110536 = sum of:
0.016110536 = weight(_text_:29 in 2282) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.016110536 = score(doc=2282,freq=2.0), product of:
0.08290443 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
0.023567878 = queryNorm
0.19432661 = fieldWeight in 2282, 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=2282)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.0072441325 = product of:
0.014488265 = sum of:
0.014488265 = weight(_text_:international in 2282) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.014488265 = score(doc=2282,freq=2.0), product of:
0.078619614 = queryWeight, product of:
3.33588 = idf(docFreq=4276, maxDocs=44218)
0.023567878 = queryNorm
0.18428308 = fieldWeight in 2282, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.33588 = idf(docFreq=4276, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2282)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.007982805 = product of:
0.01596561 = sum of:
0.01596561 = weight(_text_:22 in 2282) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.01596561 = score(doc=2282,freq=2.0), product of:
0.08253069 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.023567878 = queryNorm
0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 2282, 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=2282)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.13043478 = coord(3/23)
- Date
- 8.11.2015 21:27:22
- Source
- Classification and authority control: expanding resource discovery: proceedings of the International UDC Seminar 2015, 29-30 October 2015, Lisbon, Portugal. Eds.: Slavic, A. u. M.I. Cordeiro
-
Green, R.: Facet analysis and semantic frames (2017)
0.00
0.002714016 = product of:
0.031211182 = sum of:
0.02396705 = sum of:
0.007856515 = weight(_text_:1 in 3849) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.007856515 = score(doc=3849,freq=2.0), product of:
0.057894554 = queryWeight, product of:
2.4565027 = idf(docFreq=10304, maxDocs=44218)
0.023567878 = queryNorm
0.13570388 = fieldWeight in 3849, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
2.4565027 = idf(docFreq=10304, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3849)
0.016110536 = weight(_text_:29 in 3849) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.016110536 = score(doc=3849,freq=2.0), product of:
0.08290443 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
0.023567878 = queryNorm
0.19432661 = fieldWeight in 3849, 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=3849)
0.0072441325 = product of:
0.014488265 = sum of:
0.014488265 = weight(_text_:international in 3849) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.014488265 = score(doc=3849,freq=2.0), product of:
0.078619614 = queryWeight, product of:
3.33588 = idf(docFreq=4276, maxDocs=44218)
0.023567878 = queryNorm
0.18428308 = fieldWeight in 3849, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.33588 = idf(docFreq=4276, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3849)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.08695652 = coord(2/23)
- Abstract
- Various fields, each with its own theories, techniques, and tools, are concerned with identifying and representing the conceptual structure of specific knowledge domains. This paper compares facet analysis, an analytic technique coming out of knowledge organization (especially as undertaken by members of the Classification Research Group (CRG)), with semantic frame analysis, an analytic technique coming out of lexical semantics (especially as undertaken by the developers of Frame-Net) The investigation addresses three questions: 1) how do CRG-style facet analysis and semantic frame analysis characterize the conceptual structures that they identify?; 2) how similar are the techniques they use?; and, 3) how similar are the conceptual structures they produce? Facet analysis is concerned with the logical categories underlying the terminology of an entire field, while semantic frame analysis is concerned with the participant-and-prop structure manifest in sentences about a type of situation or event. When their scope of application is similar, as, for example, in the areas of the performing arts or education, the resulting facets and semantic frame elements often bear striking resemblance, without being the same; facets are more often expressed as semantic types, while frame elements are more often expressed as roles.
- Content
- Beitrag in einem Special Issue: Selected Papers from the International UDC Seminar 2017, Faceted Classification Today: Theory, Technology and End Users, 14-15 September, London UK.
- Date
- 29. 9.2017 18:58:02
-
Green, R.; Fraser, L.: Patterns in verbal polysemy (2004)
0.00
0.002128612 = product of:
0.024479039 = sum of:
0.012888429 = product of:
0.025776858 = sum of:
0.025776858 = weight(_text_:29 in 2621) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.025776858 = score(doc=2621,freq=2.0), product of:
0.08290443 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
0.023567878 = queryNorm
0.31092256 = fieldWeight in 2621, 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=2621)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.011590611 = product of:
0.023181222 = sum of:
0.023181222 = weight(_text_:international in 2621) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.023181222 = score(doc=2621,freq=2.0), product of:
0.078619614 = queryWeight, product of:
3.33588 = idf(docFreq=4276, maxDocs=44218)
0.023567878 = queryNorm
0.2948529 = fieldWeight in 2621, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.33588 = idf(docFreq=4276, maxDocs=44218)
0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=2621)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.08695652 = coord(2/23)
- Pages
- S.29-34
- 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
-
Green, R.: Facet detection using WorldCat and WordNet (2014)
0.00
0.001853714 = product of:
0.021317711 = sum of:
0.010141784 = product of:
0.020283569 = sum of:
0.020283569 = weight(_text_:international in 1419) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.020283569 = score(doc=1419,freq=2.0), product of:
0.078619614 = queryWeight, product of:
3.33588 = idf(docFreq=4276, maxDocs=44218)
0.023567878 = queryNorm
0.2579963 = fieldWeight in 1419, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.33588 = idf(docFreq=4276, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=1419)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.011175927 = product of:
0.022351854 = sum of:
0.022351854 = weight(_text_:22 in 1419) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.022351854 = score(doc=1419,freq=2.0), product of:
0.08253069 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.023567878 = queryNorm
0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 1419, 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=1419)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.08695652 = coord(2/23)
- Source
- Knowledge organization in the 21st century: between historical patterns and future prospects. Proceedings of the Thirteenth International ISKO Conference 19-22 May 2014, Kraków, Poland. Ed.: Wieslaw Babik
-
Green, R.: Development of a relational thesaurus (1996)
0.00
0.0016604847 = product of:
0.019095574 = sum of:
0.00895379 = weight(_text_:und in 5159) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.00895379 = score(doc=5159,freq=2.0), product of:
0.052235067 = queryWeight, product of:
2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
0.023567878 = queryNorm
0.17141339 = fieldWeight in 5159, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=5159)
0.010141784 = product of:
0.020283569 = sum of:
0.020283569 = weight(_text_:international in 5159) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.020283569 = score(doc=5159,freq=2.0), product of:
0.078619614 = queryWeight, product of:
3.33588 = idf(docFreq=4276, maxDocs=44218)
0.023567878 = queryNorm
0.2579963 = fieldWeight in 5159, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.33588 = idf(docFreq=4276, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=5159)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.08695652 = coord(2/23)
- Source
- Knowledge organization and change: Proceedings of the Fourth International ISKO Conference, 15-18 July 1996, Library of Congress, Washington, DC. Ed.: R. Green
- Theme
- Konzeption und Anwendung des Prinzips Thesaurus
-
Green, R.: Attribution and relationality (1998)
0.00
0.0015544195 = product of:
0.017875824 = sum of:
0.0062852125 = product of:
0.012570425 = sum of:
0.012570425 = weight(_text_:1 in 6425) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.012570425 = score(doc=6425,freq=2.0), product of:
0.057894554 = queryWeight, product of:
2.4565027 = idf(docFreq=10304, maxDocs=44218)
0.023567878 = queryNorm
0.2171262 = fieldWeight in 6425, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
2.4565027 = idf(docFreq=10304, maxDocs=44218)
0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=6425)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.011590611 = product of:
0.023181222 = sum of:
0.023181222 = weight(_text_:international in 6425) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.023181222 = score(doc=6425,freq=2.0), product of:
0.078619614 = queryWeight, product of:
3.33588 = idf(docFreq=4276, maxDocs=44218)
0.023567878 = queryNorm
0.2948529 = fieldWeight in 6425, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.33588 = idf(docFreq=4276, maxDocs=44218)
0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=6425)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.08695652 = coord(2/23)
- Abstract
- The paper examines the role of attributes within entity-relationship-based conceptual modeling, investigating the interplay between attributes and relationships within (1) data modeling and (2) natural language use. Attribution is found to be an important relationship type. The lack of distinctiveness between attributes and relationships leads to a re-examination of how hierarchy should be treated in both the practice and theory of knowledge organization
- Source
- Structures and relations in knowledge organization: Proceedings of the 5th International ISKO-Conference, Lille, 25.-29.8.1998. Ed.: W. Mustafa el Hadi et al
-
Green, R.: Description in the electronic environment (1996)
0.00
0.001360117 = product of:
0.015641345 = sum of:
0.005499561 = product of:
0.010999122 = sum of:
0.010999122 = weight(_text_:1 in 3685) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.010999122 = score(doc=3685,freq=2.0), product of:
0.057894554 = queryWeight, product of:
2.4565027 = idf(docFreq=10304, maxDocs=44218)
0.023567878 = queryNorm
0.18998542 = fieldWeight in 3685, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
2.4565027 = idf(docFreq=10304, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=3685)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.010141784 = product of:
0.020283569 = sum of:
0.020283569 = weight(_text_:international in 3685) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.020283569 = score(doc=3685,freq=2.0), product of:
0.078619614 = queryWeight, product of:
3.33588 = idf(docFreq=4276, maxDocs=44218)
0.023567878 = queryNorm
0.2579963 = fieldWeight in 3685, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.33588 = idf(docFreq=4276, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=3685)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.08695652 = coord(2/23)
- Abstract
- The significant differences that exist between the print and digital worlds are sometimes felt to diminish the need for bibliographic description in the electronic world. An analysis of these differences, especially with respect to (1) the control of production and distribution of documents and (2) the need for software intermediation, coupled with a discussion of the functions of bibliographic description in the task of document retrieval argue, however, for an increased role for bibliographic description in the electronic world
- Source
- Knowledge organization and change: Proceedings of the Fourth International ISKO Conference, 15-18 July 1996, Library of Congress, Washington, DC. Ed.: R. Green
-
Green, R.; Panzer, M.: Relations in the notational hierarchy of the Dewey Decimal Classification (2011)
0.00
0.0013303827 = product of:
0.0152994 = sum of:
0.008055268 = product of:
0.016110536 = sum of:
0.016110536 = weight(_text_:29 in 4823) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.016110536 = score(doc=4823,freq=2.0), product of:
0.08290443 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
0.023567878 = queryNorm
0.19432661 = fieldWeight in 4823, 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=4823)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.0072441325 = product of:
0.014488265 = sum of:
0.014488265 = weight(_text_:international in 4823) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.014488265 = score(doc=4823,freq=2.0), product of:
0.078619614 = queryWeight, product of:
3.33588 = idf(docFreq=4276, maxDocs=44218)
0.023567878 = queryNorm
0.18428308 = fieldWeight in 4823, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.33588 = idf(docFreq=4276, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4823)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.08695652 = coord(2/23)
- Date
- 21.11.2011 12:29:56
- Source
- Classification and ontology: formal approaches and access to knowledge: proceedings of the International UDC Seminar, 19-20 September 2011, The Hague, The Netherlands. Eds.: A. Slavic u. E. Civallero
-
Green, R.: Semantic types, classes, and instantiation (2006)
0.00
0.0011658146 = product of:
0.013406867 = sum of:
0.0047139092 = product of:
0.0094278185 = sum of:
0.0094278185 = weight(_text_:1 in 236) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.0094278185 = score(doc=236,freq=2.0), product of:
0.057894554 = queryWeight, product of:
2.4565027 = idf(docFreq=10304, maxDocs=44218)
0.023567878 = queryNorm
0.16284466 = fieldWeight in 236, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
2.4565027 = idf(docFreq=10304, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=236)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.008692958 = product of:
0.017385917 = sum of:
0.017385917 = weight(_text_:international in 236) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.017385917 = score(doc=236,freq=2.0), product of:
0.078619614 = queryWeight, product of:
3.33588 = idf(docFreq=4276, maxDocs=44218)
0.023567878 = queryNorm
0.22113968 = fieldWeight in 236, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.33588 = idf(docFreq=4276, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=236)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.08695652 = coord(2/23)
- Abstract
- Semantic types provide a level of abstraction over particulars with shared behavior, such as in the participant structure of semantic frames. The paper presents a preliminary investigation, drawing on data from WordNet and FrameNet, into the relationship between hierarchical level and the semantic types that name frame elements (a.k.a. slots). Patterns discovered include: (1) The level of abstraction of a frame is generally matched by the level of abstraction of its frame elements. (2) The roles played by persons tend to be expressed very specifically. (3) Frame elements that mirror the name of the frame tend to be expressed specifically. (4) Some frame participants tend to be expressed at a constant (general) level of abstraction, regardless of the level of abstraction of the overall frame.
- Source
- Knowledge organization for a global learning society: Proceedings of the 9th International ISKO Conference, 4-7 July 2006, Vienna, Austria. Hrsg.: G. Budin, C. Swertz u. K. Mitgutsch
-
Green, R.; Bean, C.A.; Hudon, M.: Universality and basic level concepts (2003)
0.00
7.7720976E-4 = product of:
0.008937912 = sum of:
0.0031426062 = product of:
0.0062852125 = sum of:
0.0062852125 = weight(_text_:1 in 2730) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.0062852125 = score(doc=2730,freq=2.0), product of:
0.057894554 = queryWeight, product of:
2.4565027 = idf(docFreq=10304, maxDocs=44218)
0.023567878 = queryNorm
0.1085631 = fieldWeight in 2730, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
2.4565027 = idf(docFreq=10304, maxDocs=44218)
0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=2730)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.0057953056 = product of:
0.011590611 = sum of:
0.011590611 = weight(_text_:international in 2730) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.011590611 = score(doc=2730,freq=2.0), product of:
0.078619614 = queryWeight, product of:
3.33588 = idf(docFreq=4276, maxDocs=44218)
0.023567878 = queryNorm
0.14742646 = fieldWeight in 2730, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.33588 = idf(docFreq=4276, maxDocs=44218)
0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=2730)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.08695652 = coord(2/23)
- 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).
- Source
- Challenges in knowledge representation and organization for the 21st century: Integration of knowledge across boundaries. Proceedings of the 7th ISKO International Conference Granada, Spain, July 10-13, 2002. Ed.: M. López-Huertas
-
Green, R.; Bean, C.A.: Aligning systems of relationships (2006)
0.00
5.603665E-4 = product of:
0.012888429 = sum of:
0.012888429 = product of:
0.025776858 = sum of:
0.025776858 = weight(_text_:29 in 4949) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.025776858 = score(doc=4949,freq=2.0), product of:
0.08290443 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
0.023567878 = queryNorm
0.31092256 = fieldWeight in 4949, 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=4949)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.04347826 = coord(1/23)
- Date
- 29. 2.2008 19:20:53
-
Green, R.: Automated identification of frame semantic relational structures (2000)
0.00
4.4094716E-4 = product of:
0.010141784 = sum of:
0.010141784 = product of:
0.020283569 = sum of:
0.020283569 = weight(_text_:international in 110) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.020283569 = score(doc=110,freq=2.0), product of:
0.078619614 = queryWeight, product of:
3.33588 = idf(docFreq=4276, maxDocs=44218)
0.023567878 = queryNorm
0.2579963 = fieldWeight in 110, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.33588 = idf(docFreq=4276, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=110)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.04347826 = coord(1/23)
- Source
- Dynamism and stability in knowledge organization: Proceedings of the 6th International ISKO-Conference, 10-13 July 2000, Toronto, Canada. Ed.: C. Beghtol et al
-
Green, R.: Making visible hidden relationships in the Dewey Decimal Classification : how relative index terms relate to DDC classes (2008)
0.00
4.4094716E-4 = product of:
0.010141784 = sum of:
0.010141784 = product of:
0.020283569 = sum of:
0.020283569 = weight(_text_:international in 2236) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.020283569 = score(doc=2236,freq=2.0), product of:
0.078619614 = queryWeight, product of:
3.33588 = idf(docFreq=4276, maxDocs=44218)
0.023567878 = queryNorm
0.2579963 = fieldWeight in 2236, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.33588 = idf(docFreq=4276, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=2236)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.04347826 = coord(1/23)
- Source
- Culture and identity in knowledge organization: Proceedings of the Tenth International ISKO Conference 5-8 August 2008, Montreal, Canada. Ed. by Clément Arsenault and Joseph T. Tennis
-
Green, R.; Panzer, M.: ¬The ontological character of classes in the Dewey Decimal Classification
0.00
4.4094716E-4 = product of:
0.010141784 = sum of:
0.010141784 = product of:
0.020283569 = sum of:
0.020283569 = weight(_text_:international in 3530) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.020283569 = score(doc=3530,freq=2.0), product of:
0.078619614 = queryWeight, product of:
3.33588 = idf(docFreq=4276, maxDocs=44218)
0.023567878 = queryNorm
0.2579963 = fieldWeight in 3530, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.33588 = idf(docFreq=4276, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=3530)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.04347826 = coord(1/23)
- Source
- Paradigms and conceptual systems in knowledge organization: Proceedings of the Eleventh International ISKO conference, Rome, 23-26 February 2010, ed. Claudio Gnoli, Indeks, Frankfurt M
-
Green, R.: Indigenous Peoples in the U.S., sovereign nations, and the DDC (2015)
0.00
4.2027488E-4 = product of:
0.009666322 = sum of:
0.009666322 = product of:
0.019332644 = sum of:
0.019332644 = weight(_text_:29 in 2201) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.019332644 = score(doc=2201,freq=2.0), product of:
0.08290443 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
0.023567878 = queryNorm
0.23319192 = fieldWeight in 2201, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2201)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.04347826 = coord(1/23)
- Date
- 4. 9.2015 18:53:29
-
Green, R.: Conceptual universals in knowledge organization and representation (2003)
0.00
3.779547E-4 = product of:
0.008692958 = sum of:
0.008692958 = product of:
0.017385917 = sum of:
0.017385917 = weight(_text_:international in 2629) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.017385917 = score(doc=2629,freq=2.0), product of:
0.078619614 = queryWeight, product of:
3.33588 = idf(docFreq=4276, maxDocs=44218)
0.023567878 = queryNorm
0.22113968 = fieldWeight in 2629, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.33588 = idf(docFreq=4276, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2629)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.04347826 = coord(1/23)
- Source
- Challenges in knowledge representation and organization for the 21st century: Integration of knowledge across boundaries. Proceedings of the 7th ISKO International Conference Granada, Spain, July 10-13, 2002. Ed.: M. López-Huertas
-
Green, R.: Topical relevance relationships : 1: why topic matching fails (1995)
0.00
2.8984674E-4 = product of:
0.0066664745 = sum of:
0.0066664745 = product of:
0.013332949 = sum of:
0.013332949 = weight(_text_:1 in 3722) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.013332949 = score(doc=3722,freq=4.0), product of:
0.057894554 = queryWeight, product of:
2.4565027 = idf(docFreq=10304, maxDocs=44218)
0.023567878 = queryNorm
0.23029712 = fieldWeight in 3722, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
2.4565027 = idf(docFreq=10304, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=3722)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.04347826 = coord(1/23)
- Abstract
- Presents conceptual background. Since topicality is a major factor in relevance, it is crucial to identify the range of relationship types that occur between the topics of user needs and the topics of texts relevant to those needs. Assumes that a single relationship type obtains i.e. that the 2 topics match. Evidence from the analysis of recall failures, citation analysis, and knowledge synthesis suggests otherwise: topical relevance relationships are not limited to topic matching relationships; to the contrary, in certain circumstances they are quite likely not to be matching relationships. Relationships are 1 of the 2 fundamental components of human conceptual systems. Attempts to classify them usually accept a distinction between relationships that occur by virute of the combination of component units (syntagmatic relationships) and relationships that are bulit into the language system (paradigmatic relationships). Given the variety of relationship types previously identified, empirical research is needed to determine the subset that actually account for topical relevance
-
Green, R.: ISKO and knowledge organization's 25th Anniversary : the future of knowledge organization and ISKO panel discussion (2014)
0.00
2.3911135E-4 = product of:
0.005499561 = sum of:
0.005499561 = product of:
0.010999122 = sum of:
0.010999122 = weight(_text_:1 in 1394) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.010999122 = score(doc=1394,freq=2.0), product of:
0.057894554 = queryWeight, product of:
2.4565027 = idf(docFreq=10304, maxDocs=44218)
0.023567878 = queryNorm
0.18998542 = fieldWeight in 1394, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
2.4565027 = idf(docFreq=10304, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=1394)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.04347826 = coord(1/23)
- Abstract
- The main idea of this panel was to create a platform for discussing knowledge organization in the past, present, and future within ISKO. During the panel discussion the following three questions were asked: 1) What is knowledge organization (KO)? 2) What changes do you foresee in the future that will prove to be the most challenging for ISKO? 3) What is your ideal picture of what the ISKO of the future could be? How do we get there? Teilnehmer: Rebecca Green, Claudio Gnoli, Dagobert Soergel, Hans-Peter Ohly, Inegtraut Dahlberg, Joseph Tennis, Vera Dodebei, Rosa San Segundo, Wieslaw Babik, Amos David, Grant Campbell, Laura Ridenour, Jill McTavish.
-
Green, R.: ¬The profession's models of information : a cognitive linguistic analysis (1991)
0.00
2.0495258E-4 = product of:
0.0047139092 = sum of:
0.0047139092 = product of:
0.0094278185 = sum of:
0.0094278185 = weight(_text_:1 in 2724) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.0094278185 = score(doc=2724,freq=2.0), product of:
0.057894554 = queryWeight, product of:
2.4565027 = idf(docFreq=10304, maxDocs=44218)
0.023567878 = queryNorm
0.16284466 = fieldWeight in 2724, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
2.4565027 = idf(docFreq=10304, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2724)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.04347826 = coord(1/23)
- Abstract
- This study establishes 3 predominant cognitive models of information and the information transfer process manifest in the literature of library and information science, based on a linguistic analysis of phrases incoporating the word 'information' from a random sample of abstracts in the LISA database. The direct communication (DC) and indirect communication (IC) models (drawn from Reddy's frameworks of metalinguistic usage) adopt the perspective of the information system; the information-seeking (IS) model takes the viewpoint of the information user. 2 disturbing findings are presented: 1. core elements of the DC and IC models are more weakly supported by the data than are most of the peripheral elements; and 2. even though the IS model presents the information user's perspective, the data emphasise the role of the information system. These findings suggest respectively that the field lacks a coherent model of information transfer per se and that our model of information retrieval is mechanistic, oblivious to the cognitive models of end users
