-
Drabenstott, K.M.; Riester, L.C.; Dede, B.A.: Shelflisting using expert systems (1992)
0.00
3.854188E-4 = product of:
0.0057812817 = sum of:
0.003527615 = weight(_text_:in in 2101) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.003527615 = score(doc=2101,freq=2.0), product of:
0.029340398 = queryWeight, product of:
1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
0.021569785 = queryNorm
0.120230645 = fieldWeight in 2101, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=2101)
0.002253667 = weight(_text_:s in 2101) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.002253667 = score(doc=2101,freq=2.0), product of:
0.023451481 = queryWeight, product of:
1.0872376 = idf(docFreq=40523, maxDocs=44218)
0.021569785 = queryNorm
0.09609913 = fieldWeight in 2101, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
1.0872376 = idf(docFreq=40523, maxDocs=44218)
0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=2101)
0.06666667 = coord(2/30)
- Abstract
- A prototype expert system for the computer science section (QA75 to QA76.95) of Library of Congress Classification was built using the Mahogany Professional expert system shell. The prototype demonstrates an expert systes application in which the system is enlisted as an intelligent job aid to assist users during the actual performance of shelflisting
- Pages
- S.199-208
-
Drabenstott, K.M.; Dede, B.A.R.; Leavit, M.: ¬The changes of meaning in subdivided subject headings (1999)
0.00
3.6212345E-4 = product of:
0.0054318514 = sum of:
0.003741601 = weight(_text_:in in 5353) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.003741601 = score(doc=5353,freq=4.0), product of:
0.029340398 = queryWeight, product of:
1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
0.021569785 = queryNorm
0.12752387 = fieldWeight in 5353, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=5353)
0.0016902501 = weight(_text_:s in 5353) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.0016902501 = score(doc=5353,freq=2.0), product of:
0.023451481 = queryWeight, product of:
1.0872376 = idf(docFreq=40523, maxDocs=44218)
0.021569785 = queryNorm
0.072074346 = fieldWeight in 5353, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
1.0872376 = idf(docFreq=40523, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=5353)
0.06666667 = coord(2/30)
- Abstract
- The impetus for a large-scale study on subject heading understanding was a recommendation of the Library of Congress (LC) Subject Subdivisions Conference that suggested standardizing the order of subject subdivisions for the purpose of simplifying subject cataloging. This paper focuses on unexpected large-scale study findings about multiple meanings for subdivided subject headings and the effects that changes of meaning for different orders of subdivisions had on the meanings that end users and librarians provided to subdivided subject headings. Findings about changes of meaning in subdivided subject headings did not dissuade the authors regarding their recommendation that the library community adopt a standard order of subdivisions. The authors also give suggestions for additional studies of subject heading understanding that build on this one.
- Source
- Cataloging and classification quarterly. 28(1999) no.3, S.19-43
-
Drabenstott, K.M.; Weller, M.S.: Handling spelling errors in online catalog searches (1996)
0.00
3.4848653E-4 = product of:
0.0052272975 = sum of:
0.0038187557 = weight(_text_:in in 5973) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.0038187557 = score(doc=5973,freq=6.0), product of:
0.029340398 = queryWeight, product of:
1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
0.021569785 = queryNorm
0.1301535 = fieldWeight in 5973, product of:
2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
6.0 = termFreq=6.0
1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=5973)
0.0014085418 = weight(_text_:s in 5973) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.0014085418 = score(doc=5973,freq=2.0), product of:
0.023451481 = queryWeight, product of:
1.0872376 = idf(docFreq=40523, maxDocs=44218)
0.021569785 = queryNorm
0.060061958 = fieldWeight in 5973, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
1.0872376 = idf(docFreq=40523, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=5973)
0.06666667 = coord(2/30)
- Abstract
- Reports results of 2 separate but related projects to study the influence of spelling errors (misspellings), made by searchers, on the subject searching of online catalogues and to suggest ways of improving error detection systems to handle the errors that they detect. This involved the categorization of user queries for subjects that were extracted from the online catalogue transaction logs of 4 USA university libraries. The research questions considered: the prevalence of misspellings in user queries for subjects; and how users respond to online catalogues that detect possible spelling errors in their subject queries. Less than 6% of user queries that match the catalogue's controlled and free text terms were found to contain spelling errors. While the majority of users corrected misspelled query words, a sizable proportion made an action that was even more detrimental than the original misspelling. Concludes with 3 recommended improvements: online catalogues should be equipped with search trees to place the burden of selecting a subject the system instead of the user; systems should be equipped with automatic spelling checking routines that inform users of possibly misspelled words; and online catalogues should be enhanced with tools and techniques to distinguish between queries that fail due to misspellings and correction failures. Cautions that spelling is not a serious problem but can seriously hinder the most routine subject search
- Source
- Library resources and technical services. 40(1996) no.2, S.113-132
-
Drabenstott, K.M.: Do nondomain experts enlist the strategies of domain experts? (2003)
0.00
3.4848653E-4 = product of:
0.0052272975 = sum of:
0.0038187557 = weight(_text_:in in 1713) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.0038187557 = score(doc=1713,freq=6.0), product of:
0.029340398 = queryWeight, product of:
1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
0.021569785 = queryNorm
0.1301535 = fieldWeight in 1713, product of:
2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
6.0 = termFreq=6.0
1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1713)
0.0014085418 = weight(_text_:s in 1713) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.0014085418 = score(doc=1713,freq=2.0), product of:
0.023451481 = queryWeight, product of:
1.0872376 = idf(docFreq=40523, maxDocs=44218)
0.021569785 = queryNorm
0.060061958 = fieldWeight in 1713, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
1.0872376 = idf(docFreq=40523, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1713)
0.06666667 = coord(2/30)
- Abstract
- User studies demonstrate that nondomain experts do not use the same information-seeking strategies as domain experts. Because of the transformation of integrated library systems into Information Gateways in the late 1990s, both nondomain experts and domain experts have had available to them the wide range of information-seeking strategies in a single system. This article describes the results of a study to answer three research questions: (1) do nondomain experts enlist the strategies of domain experts? (2) if they do, how did they learn about these strategies? and (3) are they successful using them? Interviews, audio recordings, screen captures, and observations were used to gather data from 14 undergraduate students who searched an academic library's Information Gateway. The few times that the undergraduates in this study enlisted search strategies that were characteristic of domain experts, it usually took perseverance, trial-and-error, serendipity, or a combination of all three for them to find useful information. Although this study's results provide no compelling reasons for systems to support features that make domain-expert strategies possible, there is need for system features that scaffold nondomain experts from their usual strategies to the strategies characteristic of domain experts.
- Source
- Journal of the American Society for Information Science and technology. 54(2003) no.9, S.836-854
-
Drabenstott, K.M.; Cochrane, P.A.: Improvements needed for better subject access to library catalogs via the Internet (1994)
0.00
3.3724142E-4 = product of:
0.005058621 = sum of:
0.0030866629 = weight(_text_:in in 8486) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.0030866629 = score(doc=8486,freq=2.0), product of:
0.029340398 = queryWeight, product of:
1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
0.021569785 = queryNorm
0.10520181 = fieldWeight in 8486, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=8486)
0.0019719584 = weight(_text_:s in 8486) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.0019719584 = score(doc=8486,freq=2.0), product of:
0.023451481 = queryWeight, product of:
1.0872376 = idf(docFreq=40523, maxDocs=44218)
0.021569785 = queryNorm
0.08408674 = fieldWeight in 8486, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
1.0872376 = idf(docFreq=40523, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=8486)
0.06666667 = coord(2/30)
- Abstract
- Reports an empirical study of online catalogues accessible over the Internet and discusses the problems revealed in subject searching them. Suggests 4 tools to improve subject searching: search trees, an online directory of collections strengths of Internet accessible library collections, aids to find this record or simular records, and common command language for every Internet accessible library catalogue or bibliographic database
- Pages
- S.70-71
-
Vizine-Goetz, D.; Drabenstott, K.M.: Computer and manual analysis of subject terms entered by online catalog users (1991)
0.00
2.890641E-4 = product of:
0.0043359613 = sum of:
0.0026457112 = weight(_text_:in in 3679) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.0026457112 = score(doc=3679,freq=2.0), product of:
0.029340398 = queryWeight, product of:
1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
0.021569785 = queryNorm
0.09017298 = fieldWeight in 3679, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=3679)
0.0016902501 = weight(_text_:s in 3679) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.0016902501 = score(doc=3679,freq=2.0), product of:
0.023451481 = queryWeight, product of:
1.0872376 = idf(docFreq=40523, maxDocs=44218)
0.021569785 = queryNorm
0.072074346 = fieldWeight in 3679, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
1.0872376 = idf(docFreq=40523, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=3679)
0.06666667 = coord(2/30)
- Abstract
- Subject queries were extracted from 3 universities' online catalogues and analysed to determine the extend to which they matched subject headings in the LCSH. Computer analyses show that nearly 25% of the subject queries entered by online catalogue users are exact matches of LCSH. Yet, manual analyses show that, even though a user matches or closely matches LCSH-mr, the citations retrieved by this vocabulary are not necessarily satisfactory. Sometimes the closest LCSH-mr is not at all pertinent to a user's topic of interest. This study presents reasons why close matches of LCSH-mr are not always satisfactory and suggests approaches to finding the best matches of the catalogue's controlled vocabulary
- Pages
- S.156-161.
-
Drabenstott, K.M.; Simcox, S.; Fenton, E.G.: Do patrons understand Library of Congress Subject Headings? (1999)
0.00
1.5935833E-4 = product of:
0.00478075 = sum of:
0.00478075 = weight(_text_:s in 6072) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.00478075 = score(doc=6072,freq=4.0), product of:
0.023451481 = queryWeight, product of:
1.0872376 = idf(docFreq=40523, maxDocs=44218)
0.021569785 = queryNorm
0.20385705 = fieldWeight in 6072, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
1.0872376 = idf(docFreq=40523, maxDocs=44218)
0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=6072)
0.033333335 = coord(1/30)
- Source
- Technicalities. 19(1999) no.1, S.6-9
-
Drabenstott, K.M.: Enhancing a new design for subject access to online catalogs (1994)
0.00
1.5024448E-4 = product of:
0.004507334 = sum of:
0.004507334 = weight(_text_:s in 6831) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.004507334 = score(doc=6831,freq=2.0), product of:
0.023451481 = queryWeight, product of:
1.0872376 = idf(docFreq=40523, maxDocs=44218)
0.021569785 = queryNorm
0.19219826 = fieldWeight in 6831, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
1.0872376 = idf(docFreq=40523, maxDocs=44218)
0.125 = fieldNorm(doc=6831)
0.033333335 = coord(1/30)
- Source
- Annual review of OCLC research. 1994, S.52-54
-
Drabenstott, K.M.; Demeyer, A.N.; Gerckens, J.; Poe, D.T.: Analysis of a bibliographic database enhanced with a library classification (1990)
0.00
1.3146391E-4 = product of:
0.003943917 = sum of:
0.003943917 = weight(_text_:s in 5275) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.003943917 = score(doc=5275,freq=2.0), product of:
0.023451481 = queryWeight, product of:
1.0872376 = idf(docFreq=40523, maxDocs=44218)
0.021569785 = queryNorm
0.16817348 = fieldWeight in 5275, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
1.0872376 = idf(docFreq=40523, maxDocs=44218)
0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=5275)
0.033333335 = coord(1/30)
- Source
- Library resources and technical services. 34(1990), S.179-198
-
Drabenstott, K.M.: Interpreting the findings of "A study of library users and their understanding of subject headings" (1999)
0.00
1.12683345E-4 = product of:
0.0033805002 = sum of:
0.0033805002 = weight(_text_:s in 6178) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.0033805002 = score(doc=6178,freq=2.0), product of:
0.023451481 = queryWeight, product of:
1.0872376 = idf(docFreq=40523, maxDocs=44218)
0.021569785 = queryNorm
0.14414869 = fieldWeight in 6178, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
1.0872376 = idf(docFreq=40523, maxDocs=44218)
0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=6178)
0.033333335 = coord(1/30)
- Source
- Technicalities. 19(1999) no.4, S.13-15
