Search (86 results, page 1 of 5)

  • × theme_ss:"Referieren"
  1. Brintzinger, K.-R.: Abstracts im Verbund : Von der bibliothekarischen zur nutzerorientierten Erschließung. ein Versuch des Juristischen Seminars der Universität Tübingen (2003) 0.04 
    0.043109395 = product of:
  0.14369798 = sum of:
    0.018730707 = weight(_text_:und in 1548) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.018730707 = score(doc=1548,freq=32.0), product of:
        0.04780656 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
          0.021569785 = queryNorm
        0.39180204 = fieldWeight in 1548, product of:
          5.656854 = tf(freq=32.0), with freq of:
            32.0 = termFreq=32.0
          2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=1548)
    0.004988801 = weight(_text_:in in 1548) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.004988801 = score(doc=1548,freq=16.0), product of:
        0.029340398 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.021569785 = queryNorm
        0.17003182 = fieldWeight in 1548, product of:
          4.0 = tf(freq=16.0), with freq of:
            16.0 = termFreq=16.0
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=1548)
    0.02662638 = weight(_text_:einzelnen in 1548) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.02662638 = score(doc=1548,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.1139978 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.285069 = idf(docFreq=608, maxDocs=44218)
          0.021569785 = queryNorm
        0.23356925 = fieldWeight in 1548, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          5.285069 = idf(docFreq=608, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=1548)
    0.018730707 = weight(_text_:und in 1548) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.018730707 = score(doc=1548,freq=32.0), product of:
        0.04780656 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
          0.021569785 = queryNorm
        0.39180204 = fieldWeight in 1548, product of:
          5.656854 = tf(freq=32.0), with freq of:
            32.0 = termFreq=32.0
          2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=1548)
    0.013535069 = weight(_text_:bibliotheken in 1548) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.013535069 = score(doc=1548,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.08127756 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.768121 = idf(docFreq=2775, maxDocs=44218)
          0.021569785 = queryNorm
        0.16652898 = fieldWeight in 1548, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.768121 = idf(docFreq=2775, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=1548)
    0.013535069 = weight(_text_:bibliotheken in 1548) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.013535069 = score(doc=1548,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.08127756 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.768121 = idf(docFreq=2775, maxDocs=44218)
          0.021569785 = queryNorm
        0.16652898 = fieldWeight in 1548, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.768121 = idf(docFreq=2775, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=1548)
    0.013535069 = weight(_text_:bibliotheken in 1548) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.013535069 = score(doc=1548,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.08127756 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.768121 = idf(docFreq=2775, maxDocs=44218)
          0.021569785 = queryNorm
        0.16652898 = fieldWeight in 1548, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.768121 = idf(docFreq=2775, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=1548)
    0.0011268335 = weight(_text_:s in 1548) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0011268335 = score(doc=1548,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.023451481 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.0872376 = idf(docFreq=40523, maxDocs=44218)
          0.021569785 = queryNorm
        0.048049565 = fieldWeight in 1548, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          1.0872376 = idf(docFreq=40523, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=1548)
    0.032889348 = weight(_text_:stuttgart in 1548) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.032889348 = score(doc=1548,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.1266975 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.8738413 = idf(docFreq=337, maxDocs=44218)
          0.021569785 = queryNorm
        0.25958955 = fieldWeight in 1548, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          5.8738413 = idf(docFreq=337, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=1548)
  0.3 = coord(9/30)
    Abstract
    Bericht über die Integration von Abstracts in den Katalog
    Content
    "Der etwas provokante Titel soll keineswegs eine Dichotomie zwischen bibliothekarischer und nutzerorientierter Erschließung implizieren, sondern zwei Fragen stellen: Was suchen Nutzer in Bibliotheken? Was wollen Nutzer wissen? Die Antwort darauf wird immer heißen: Nutzer suchen nach Inhalten und wollen Informationen über Inhalte. Formale Aspekte, die unter bibliothekarischen Gesichtspunkten durchaus bedeutend sind, spielen für den Nutzer keine große Rolle, Schlagworte als Instrumente der verbalen Sacherschließung beschreiben Inhalte häufig unzureichend und sind für Nutzer vielfach unverständlich. Die bunten Kataloge der Internet-Buchhändler stellen zunehmend einen Kontrast, aber auch eine Konkurrenz zu unseren OPACs dar. Wer in diesen Katalogen recherchiert, findet zwar meist nur eine rudimentäre und natürlich bibliothekarischen Kriterien nicht entsprechende Titelbeschreibung, dafür jedoch regelmäßig zusätzliche Informationen wie Abstracts oder Verlagsinformationen, Rezensionen, Abbildungen, Textproben. Sollen wir uns nun den Katalog von Amazon.de (und seiner Konkurrenten) zum Vorbild nehmen? Wir meinen ja und erfassen daher Abstracts und andere Inhaltsinformationen, die wir mit unseren Titelaufnahmen im Verbund verlinken. Wir sehen darin eine Fortsetzung unseres seit einigen Jahren verfolgten Zieles, die traditionelle Sach- und Formalerschließung um neue Komponenten zu erweitern. Seit 1997 beteiligen wir uns an der kooperativen Aufsatzerschließung, insbesondere durch die Katalogisierung von Festschriftenaufsätzen. Aufsätze in fortlaufenden Sammelwerken katalogisieren wir nur ausnahmsweise, jedoch weisen wir von den Verlagen im Internet angebotene Inhaltsinformationen über Zeitschriften (Inhaltsverzeichnisse, Abstracts, Volltexte) auf der lokalen Ebene nach. Mit unserem Versuch, Abstracts in eine Datenbank des Verbundes einzustellen, haben wir Ende 2000 begonnen. Von ausgewählten Monographien werden Klappentexte, Verlagsinformationen und Abstracts erfasst und mit der Titelaufnahme verlinkt. Unser bisheriges Verfahren ist handgestrickt - hat aber den Vorteil, dass es ohne zusätzliche Technik auskommt und unmittelbar umsetzbar ist: In einem ersten Schritt werden Klappentexte und Inhaltsinformationen von geeigneten Werken ausgewählt. Die Auswahl berücksichtigt sowohl die Bedeutung des Buches wie Umfang und Qualität der Inhaltsinformationen. Das Erfassen der Texte geschieht durch Einscannen oder - wenn dies bei kurzen Texten effizienter ist - durch Abschreiben. Bei einzelnen Verlagen ist es möglich, die Texte direkt von den Webseiten des Verlages per copy-and-paste zu übernehmen. Die Doktoranden unserer Fakultät bitten wir um die Lieferung des Abstracts als Textdatei. Die durch Einscannen, Abschreiben oder Kopieren erzeugte Textdatei wird im nächsten Schritt in eine vom BSZ entwickelte Muster-HTML-Datei kopiert, konvertiert und mit der SWBIdentnummer versehen. Anschließend senden wir diese Datei per E-Mail an den Verbund. Der Verbund stellt unsere Dateien in den BSZ-Medienserver (http://www.bszbw.de/diglib/medserv/metainfhtml) ein, auf dem z.B. auch die ebenfalls mit den VerbundTiteldaten verlinkten IfB- und ekz-Rezensionen gespeichert werden."
    Pages
    S.11-14
    Source
    4. BSZ-Kolloquium am 17. und 18. September an der Universität Stuttgart. Vorträge
  2. Heinrich, G.: ¬Die "Allzweck-Annotation" und der annotierte Katalogzetteldienst : offene Fragen und mögliche Alternativen (1971) 0.04 
    0.03848366 = product of:
  0.19241829 = sum of:
    0.023178069 = weight(_text_:und in 4858) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.023178069 = score(doc=4858,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.04780656 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
          0.021569785 = queryNorm
        0.4848303 = fieldWeight in 4858, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
          0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=4858)
    0.023178069 = weight(_text_:und in 4858) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.023178069 = score(doc=4858,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.04780656 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
          0.021569785 = queryNorm
        0.4848303 = fieldWeight in 4858, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
          0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=4858)
    0.047372743 = weight(_text_:bibliotheken in 4858) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.047372743 = score(doc=4858,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.08127756 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.768121 = idf(docFreq=2775, maxDocs=44218)
          0.021569785 = queryNorm
        0.58285147 = fieldWeight in 4858, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.768121 = idf(docFreq=2775, maxDocs=44218)
          0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=4858)
    0.047372743 = weight(_text_:bibliotheken in 4858) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.047372743 = score(doc=4858,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.08127756 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.768121 = idf(docFreq=2775, maxDocs=44218)
          0.021569785 = queryNorm
        0.58285147 = fieldWeight in 4858, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.768121 = idf(docFreq=2775, maxDocs=44218)
          0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=4858)
    0.047372743 = weight(_text_:bibliotheken in 4858) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.047372743 = score(doc=4858,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.08127756 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.768121 = idf(docFreq=2775, maxDocs=44218)
          0.021569785 = queryNorm
        0.58285147 = fieldWeight in 4858, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.768121 = idf(docFreq=2775, maxDocs=44218)
          0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=4858)
    0.003943917 = weight(_text_:s in 4858) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.003943917 = score(doc=4858,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.023451481 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.0872376 = idf(docFreq=40523, maxDocs=44218)
          0.021569785 = queryNorm
        0.16817348 = fieldWeight in 4858, 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=4858)
  0.2 = coord(6/30)
    Area
    Öffentliche Bibliotheken
    Source
    BuB. 23(1971), S.233-238
  3. Scholz, M.: Qualitätssicherung von Datenbanken : eine gemeinsame Aufgabe von Autor, Schriftleitung und Dokumentar (1994) 0.04 
    0.03501128 = product of:
  0.15004835 = sum of:
    0.024778398 = weight(_text_:und in 8971) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.024778398 = score(doc=8971,freq=14.0), product of:
        0.04780656 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
          0.021569785 = queryNorm
        0.51830536 = fieldWeight in 8971, product of:
          3.7416575 = tf(freq=14.0), with freq of:
            14.0 = termFreq=14.0
          2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=8971)
    0.018942054 = product of:
      0.03788411 = sum of:
        0.03788411 = weight(_text_:bibliothekswesen in 8971) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.03788411 = score(doc=8971,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.09615103 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.457672 = idf(docFreq=1392, maxDocs=44218)
              0.021569785 = queryNorm
            0.39400625 = fieldWeight in 8971, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              4.457672 = idf(docFreq=1392, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=8971)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    0.03788411 = weight(_text_:bibliothekswesen in 8971) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.03788411 = score(doc=8971,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.09615103 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.457672 = idf(docFreq=1392, maxDocs=44218)
          0.021569785 = queryNorm
        0.39400625 = fieldWeight in 8971, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          4.457672 = idf(docFreq=1392, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=8971)
    0.03788411 = weight(_text_:bibliothekswesen in 8971) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.03788411 = score(doc=8971,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.09615103 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.457672 = idf(docFreq=1392, maxDocs=44218)
          0.021569785 = queryNorm
        0.39400625 = fieldWeight in 8971, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          4.457672 = idf(docFreq=1392, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=8971)
    0.003527615 = weight(_text_:in in 8971) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.003527615 = score(doc=8971,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.029340398 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.021569785 = queryNorm
        0.120230645 = fieldWeight in 8971, 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=8971)
    0.024778398 = weight(_text_:und in 8971) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.024778398 = score(doc=8971,freq=14.0), product of:
        0.04780656 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
          0.021569785 = queryNorm
        0.51830536 = fieldWeight in 8971, product of:
          3.7416575 = tf(freq=14.0), with freq of:
            14.0 = termFreq=14.0
          2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=8971)
    0.002253667 = weight(_text_:s in 8971) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.002253667 = score(doc=8971,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.023451481 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.0872376 = idf(docFreq=40523, maxDocs=44218)
          0.021569785 = queryNorm
        0.09609913 = fieldWeight in 8971, 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=8971)
  0.23333333 = coord(7/30)
    Abstract
    Die Gestaltung von Publikationen in Zeitschriften, Schriftenreihen und anderem Schrifttum des Agrarbereiches erfüllt oft nicht die Normen (DIN 1422 und DIN 1426). Titel, Kurzreferat (abstract) und zusätzliche Stichworte werden Bestandteile der Datenbank und tragen wesentlich zur erfolgreichen Wiederauffindung von Veröffentlichungen bei. Beispiele verdeutlichen die Notwendigkeit einer Initiative von ZADI und GBDL im FIS-ELF
    Source
    Mitteilungen der Gesellschaft für Bibliothekswesen und Dokumentation des Landbaues. 1994, H.50, S.24-27d
  4. Neumann-Duscha, I.: Über die Qualität von Referaten (1990) 0.03 
    0.034153517 = product of:
  0.14637221 = sum of:
    0.022940338 = weight(_text_:und in 8593) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.022940338 = score(doc=8593,freq=12.0), product of:
        0.04780656 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
          0.021569785 = queryNorm
        0.47985753 = fieldWeight in 8593, product of:
          3.4641016 = tf(freq=12.0), with freq of:
            12.0 = termFreq=12.0
          2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=8593)
    0.018942054 = product of:
      0.03788411 = sum of:
        0.03788411 = weight(_text_:bibliothekswesen in 8593) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.03788411 = score(doc=8593,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.09615103 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.457672 = idf(docFreq=1392, maxDocs=44218)
              0.021569785 = queryNorm
            0.39400625 = fieldWeight in 8593, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              4.457672 = idf(docFreq=1392, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=8593)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    0.03788411 = weight(_text_:bibliothekswesen in 8593) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.03788411 = score(doc=8593,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.09615103 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.457672 = idf(docFreq=1392, maxDocs=44218)
          0.021569785 = queryNorm
        0.39400625 = fieldWeight in 8593, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          4.457672 = idf(docFreq=1392, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=8593)
    0.03788411 = weight(_text_:bibliothekswesen in 8593) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.03788411 = score(doc=8593,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.09615103 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.457672 = idf(docFreq=1392, maxDocs=44218)
          0.021569785 = queryNorm
        0.39400625 = fieldWeight in 8593, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          4.457672 = idf(docFreq=1392, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=8593)
    0.003527615 = weight(_text_:in in 8593) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.003527615 = score(doc=8593,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.029340398 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.021569785 = queryNorm
        0.120230645 = fieldWeight in 8593, 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=8593)
    0.022940338 = weight(_text_:und in 8593) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.022940338 = score(doc=8593,freq=12.0), product of:
        0.04780656 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
          0.021569785 = queryNorm
        0.47985753 = fieldWeight in 8593, product of:
          3.4641016 = tf(freq=12.0), with freq of:
            12.0 = termFreq=12.0
          2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=8593)
    0.002253667 = weight(_text_:s in 8593) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.002253667 = score(doc=8593,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.023451481 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.0872376 = idf(docFreq=40523, maxDocs=44218)
          0.021569785 = queryNorm
        0.09609913 = fieldWeight in 8593, 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=8593)
  0.23333333 = coord(7/30)
    Abstract
    Die Qualität der Dokumentenanlyse entscheidet über die Wirksamkeit eines Dokumentationsvorhabens, denn Auswahl und Darstellung von Informationselementen bilden die Grundlage zum Wiederfinden des dokumentierten Wissens. Kurzreferate informieren über den Inhalt einer Veröffentlichung. Verschiedene Typen von Inhaltsangaben werden entsprechend der DIN 1426 vorgestellt, Vorschriften und Anweisungen an Referate werden analysiert und die Bewertung der Qualität von Kurzreferaten diskutiert. Das zunehmende Wissen über den Aufbau und das Information Retrieval von Faktendatenbanken führt zu der Schlußfolgerung, daß über die verbale Kurzdarstellung des Dokumenteninhalts hinaus Fakten extrahiert und in speziellen Datenbanken gespeichert werden sollten
    Source
    Mitteilungen der Gesellschaft für Bibliothekswesen und Dokumentation des Landbaus. 1990, H.46, S.53-70
  5. Endres-Niggemeyer, B.: ¬An empirical process model of abstracting (1992) 0.02 
    0.019806186 = product of:
  0.11883711 = sum of:
    0.014048031 = weight(_text_:und in 8834) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.014048031 = score(doc=8834,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.04780656 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
          0.021569785 = queryNorm
        0.29385152 = fieldWeight in 8834, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
          0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=8834)
    0.08206912 = weight(_text_:informationswissenschaft in 8834) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.08206912 = score(doc=8834,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.09716552 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.504705 = idf(docFreq=1328, maxDocs=44218)
          0.021569785 = queryNorm
        0.84463215 = fieldWeight in 8834, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          4.504705 = idf(docFreq=1328, maxDocs=44218)
          0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=8834)
    0.0052914224 = weight(_text_:in in 8834) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0052914224 = score(doc=8834,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.029340398 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.021569785 = queryNorm
        0.18034597 = fieldWeight in 8834, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=8834)
    0.014048031 = weight(_text_:und in 8834) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.014048031 = score(doc=8834,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.04780656 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
          0.021569785 = queryNorm
        0.29385152 = fieldWeight in 8834, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
          0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=8834)
    0.0033805002 = weight(_text_:s in 8834) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0033805002 = score(doc=8834,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.023451481 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.0872376 = idf(docFreq=40523, maxDocs=44218)
          0.021569785 = queryNorm
        0.14414869 = fieldWeight in 8834, 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=8834)
  0.16666667 = coord(5/30)
    Pages
    S.219-228
    Series
    Schriften zur Informationswissenschaft; Bd.7
    Source
    Mensch und Maschine: Informationelle Schnittstellen der Kommunikation. Proc. des 3. Int. Symposiums für Informationswissenschaft (ISI'92), 5.-7.11.1992 in Saarbrücken. Hrsg.: H.H. Zimmermann, H.-D. Luckhardt u. A. Schulz
  6. Reischer, J.; Lottes, D.; Meier, F.; Stirner, M.: Evaluation von Summarizing-Systemen : Kommerzielle und freie Systeme im Vergleich (2010) 0.01 
    0.014203095 = product of:
  0.10652321 = sum of:
    0.024778398 = weight(_text_:und in 492) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.024778398 = score(doc=492,freq=14.0), product of:
        0.04780656 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
          0.021569785 = queryNorm
        0.51830536 = fieldWeight in 492, product of:
          3.7416575 = tf(freq=14.0), with freq of:
            14.0 = termFreq=14.0
          2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=492)
    0.05471275 = weight(_text_:informationswissenschaft in 492) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.05471275 = score(doc=492,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.09716552 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.504705 = idf(docFreq=1328, maxDocs=44218)
          0.021569785 = queryNorm
        0.5630881 = fieldWeight in 492, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          4.504705 = idf(docFreq=1328, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=492)
    0.024778398 = weight(_text_:und in 492) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.024778398 = score(doc=492,freq=14.0), product of:
        0.04780656 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
          0.021569785 = queryNorm
        0.51830536 = fieldWeight in 492, product of:
          3.7416575 = tf(freq=14.0), with freq of:
            14.0 = termFreq=14.0
          2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=492)
    0.002253667 = weight(_text_:s in 492) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.002253667 = score(doc=492,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.023451481 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.0872376 = idf(docFreq=40523, maxDocs=44218)
          0.021569785 = queryNorm
        0.09609913 = fieldWeight in 492, 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=492)
  0.13333334 = coord(4/30)
    Abstract
    Fünf kommerzielle und freie Systeme zum automatischen Zusammenfassen von englischen Texten werden hinsichtlich ihrer Summarizing-Leistung vergleichend evaluiert. Hierfür notwendige, eigene und fremde Evaluations-Ressourcen werden vorgestellt und diskutiert sowie Auswahlkriterien für verwendete Summarizer und Evaluationsmaße dargestellt.
    Pages
    S.298-308
    Series
    Schriften zur Informationswissenschaft; Bd.58
    Source
    Information und Wissen: global, sozial und frei? Proceedings des 12. Internationalen Symposiums für Informationswissenschaft (ISI 2011) ; Hildesheim, 9. - 11. März 2011. Hrsg.: J. Griesbaum, T. Mandl u. C. Womser-Hacker
  7. Bowman, J.H.: Annotation: a lost art in cataloguing (2007) 0.01 
    0.013322177 = product of:
  0.07993306 = sum of:
    0.006901989 = weight(_text_:in in 255) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.006901989 = score(doc=255,freq=10.0), product of:
        0.029340398 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.021569785 = queryNorm
        0.23523843 = fieldWeight in 255, product of:
          3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
            10.0 = termFreq=10.0
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=255)
    0.023686372 = weight(_text_:bibliotheken in 255) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.023686372 = score(doc=255,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.08127756 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.768121 = idf(docFreq=2775, maxDocs=44218)
          0.021569785 = queryNorm
        0.29142573 = fieldWeight in 255, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.768121 = idf(docFreq=2775, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=255)
    0.023686372 = weight(_text_:bibliotheken in 255) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.023686372 = score(doc=255,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.08127756 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.768121 = idf(docFreq=2775, maxDocs=44218)
          0.021569785 = queryNorm
        0.29142573 = fieldWeight in 255, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.768121 = idf(docFreq=2775, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=255)
    0.023686372 = weight(_text_:bibliotheken in 255) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.023686372 = score(doc=255,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.08127756 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.768121 = idf(docFreq=2775, maxDocs=44218)
          0.021569785 = queryNorm
        0.29142573 = fieldWeight in 255, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.768121 = idf(docFreq=2775, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=255)
    0.0019719584 = weight(_text_:s in 255) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0019719584 = score(doc=255,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.023451481 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.0872376 = idf(docFreq=40523, maxDocs=44218)
          0.021569785 = queryNorm
        0.08408674 = fieldWeight in 255, 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=255)
  0.16666667 = coord(5/30)
    Abstract
    Public library catalogues in early twentieth-century Britain frequently included annotations, either to clarify obscure titles or to provide further information about the subject-matter of the books they described. Two manuals giving instruction on how to do this were published at that time. Following World War I, with the decline of the printed catalogue, this kind of annotation became rarer, and was almost confined to bulletins of new books. The early issues of the British National Bibliography included some annotations in exceptional cases. Parallels are drawn with the provision of table-of-contents information in present-day OPAC's.
    Area
    Öffentliche Bibliotheken
    Footnote
    Simultaneously published as Cataloger, Editor, and Scholar: Essays in Honor of Ruth C. Carter
    Source
    Cataloging and classification quarterly. 44(2007) nos.1/2, S.95-111
  8. Kuhlen, R.: Informationsaufbereitung III : Referieren (Abstracts - Abstracting - Grundlagen) (2004) 0.01 
    0.013049471 = product of:
  0.06524736 = sum of:
    0.009365354 = weight(_text_:und in 2917) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.009365354 = score(doc=2917,freq=8.0), product of:
        0.04780656 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
          0.021569785 = queryNorm
        0.19590102 = fieldWeight in 2917, product of:
          2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
            8.0 = termFreq=8.0
          2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=2917)
    0.019343877 = weight(_text_:informationswissenschaft in 2917) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.019343877 = score(doc=2917,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.09716552 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.504705 = idf(docFreq=1328, maxDocs=44218)
          0.021569785 = queryNorm
        0.1990817 = fieldWeight in 2917, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          4.504705 = idf(docFreq=1328, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=2917)
    0.0043204287 = weight(_text_:in in 2917) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0043204287 = score(doc=2917,freq=12.0), product of:
        0.029340398 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.021569785 = queryNorm
        0.14725187 = fieldWeight in 2917, product of:
          3.4641016 = tf(freq=12.0), with freq of:
            12.0 = termFreq=12.0
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=2917)
    0.009365354 = weight(_text_:und in 2917) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.009365354 = score(doc=2917,freq=8.0), product of:
        0.04780656 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
          0.021569785 = queryNorm
        0.19590102 = fieldWeight in 2917, product of:
          2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
            8.0 = termFreq=8.0
          2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=2917)
    0.021258758 = weight(_text_:deutsche in 2917) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.021258758 = score(doc=2917,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.10186133 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.7224083 = idf(docFreq=1068, maxDocs=44218)
          0.021569785 = queryNorm
        0.20870294 = fieldWeight in 2917, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          4.7224083 = idf(docFreq=1068, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=2917)
    0.0015935833 = weight(_text_:s in 2917) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0015935833 = score(doc=2917,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.023451481 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.0872376 = idf(docFreq=40523, maxDocs=44218)
          0.021569785 = queryNorm
        0.06795235 = fieldWeight in 2917, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          1.0872376 = idf(docFreq=40523, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=2917)
  0.2 = coord(6/30)
    Abstract
    Was ein Abstract (im Folgenden synonym mit Referat oder Kurzreferat gebraucht) ist, legt das American National Standards Institute in einer Weise fest, die sicherlich von den meisten Fachleuten akzeptiert werden kann: "An abstract is defined as an abbreviated, accurate representation of the contents of a document"; fast genauso die deutsche Norm DIN 1426: "Das Kurzreferat gibt kurz und klar den Inhalt des Dokuments wieder." Abstracts gehören zum wissenschaftlichen Alltag. Weitgehend allen Publikationen, zumindest in den naturwissenschaftlichen, technischen, informationsbezogenen oder medizinischen Bereichen, gehen Abstracts voran, "prefe-rably prepared by its author(s) for publication with it". Es gibt wohl keinen Wissenschaftler, der nicht irgendwann einmal ein Abstract geschrieben hätte. Gehört das Erstellen von Abstracts dann überhaupt zur dokumentarischen bzw informationswissenschaftlichen Methodenlehre, wenn es jeder kann? Was macht den informationellen Mehrwert aus, der durch Expertenreferate gegenüber Laienreferaten erzeugt wird? Dies ist nicht so leicht zu beantworten, zumal geeignete Bewertungsverfahren fehlen, die Qualität von Abstracts vergleichend "objektiv" zu messen. Abstracts werden in erheblichem Umfang von Informationsspezialisten erstellt, oft unter der Annahme, dass Autoren selber dafür weniger geeignet sind. Vergegenwärtigen wir uns, was wir über Abstracts und Abstracting wissen. Ein besonders gelungenes Abstract ist zuweilen klarer als der Ursprungstext selber, darf aber nicht mehr Information als dieser enthalten: "Good abstracts are highly structured, concise, and coherent, and are the result of a thorough analysis of the content of the abstracted materials. Abstracts may be more readable than the basis documents, but because of size constraints they rarely equal and never surpass the information content of the basic document". Dies ist verständlich, denn ein "Abstract" ist zunächst nichts anderes als ein Ergebnis des Vorgangs einer Abstraktion. Ohne uns zu sehr in die philosophischen Hintergründe der Abstraktion zu verlieren, besteht diese doch "in der Vernachlässigung von bestimmten Vorstellungsbzw. Begriffsinhalten, von welchen zugunsten anderer Teilinhalte abgesehen, abstrahiert' wird. Sie ist stets verbunden mit einer Fixierung von (interessierenden) Merkmalen durch die aktive Aufmerksamkeit, die unter einem bestimmten pragmatischen Gesichtspunkt als wesentlich' für einen vorgestellten bzw für einen unter einen Begriff fallenden Gegenstand (oder eine Mehrheit von Gegenständen) betrachtet werden". Abstracts reduzieren weniger Begriffsinhalte, sondern Texte bezüglich ihres proportionalen Gehaltes. Borko/ Bernier haben dies sogar quantifiziert; sie schätzen den Reduktionsfaktor auf 1:10 bis 1:12
    Pages
    S.189-206
    Source
    Grundlagen der praktischen Information und Dokumentation. 5., völlig neu gefaßte Ausgabe. 2 Bde. Hrsg. von R. Kuhlen, Th. Seeger u. D. Strauch. Begründet von Klaus Laisiepen, Ernst Lutterbeck, Karl-Heinrich Meyer-Uhlenried. Bd.1: Handbuch zur Einführung in die Informationswissenschaft und -praxis
  9. Hahn, U.: Abstracting - Textzusammenfassung (2023) 0.01 
    0.010423955 = product of:
  0.06254373 = sum of:
    0.014048031 = weight(_text_:und in 786) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.014048031 = score(doc=786,freq=8.0), product of:
        0.04780656 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
          0.021569785 = queryNorm
        0.29385152 = fieldWeight in 786, product of:
          2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
            8.0 = termFreq=8.0
          2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=786)
    0.029015815 = weight(_text_:informationswissenschaft in 786) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.029015815 = score(doc=786,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.09716552 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.504705 = idf(docFreq=1328, maxDocs=44218)
          0.021569785 = queryNorm
        0.29862255 = fieldWeight in 786, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          4.504705 = idf(docFreq=1328, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=786)
    0.003741601 = weight(_text_:in in 786) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.003741601 = score(doc=786,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.029340398 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.021569785 = queryNorm
        0.12752387 = fieldWeight in 786, 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=786)
    0.014048031 = weight(_text_:und in 786) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.014048031 = score(doc=786,freq=8.0), product of:
        0.04780656 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
          0.021569785 = queryNorm
        0.29385152 = fieldWeight in 786, product of:
          2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
            8.0 = termFreq=8.0
          2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=786)
    0.0016902501 = weight(_text_:s in 786) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0016902501 = score(doc=786,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.023451481 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.0872376 = idf(docFreq=40523, maxDocs=44218)
          0.021569785 = queryNorm
        0.072074346 = fieldWeight in 786, 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=786)
  0.16666667 = coord(5/30)
    Abstract
    Abstracts (hier als Sammelbegriff für jegliche Form meist schriftlicher Zusammenfassungen verstanden) beruhen auf der inhaltlichen Informationsverdichtung (Kondensierung) von längeren Quelltexten (etwa Zeitungs- oder Zeitschriftenartikel). Geht man von der Menge aller Aussagen eines Originaldokumentes (auch als Volltext bezeichnet) aus, soll ein Abstract - abhängig vom gewünschten Verdichtungsgrad - nur die wichtigsten Aussagen des Volltextes oder Generalisierungen davon in redundanzfreier, grammatikalisch korrekter, textuell kohärenter und gut lesbarer Form enthalten. Durch die Verdichtung - so die zentrale informationswissenschaftliche Annahme - gewinnt der Nutzer Übersicht über die in einem (oder mehreren) Dokument(en) behandelten Themen mit wesentlich geringerem (Zeit-)Aufwand als durch die Lektüre des Originaltextes. Es ist dabei unstrittig, dass jede Form der Kondensierung zu Informationsverlusten führt. Folglich gilt es, ein Optimum an Zeitgewinn und Informationsverlust anzustreben. Abstracting, der Prozess der Erstellung von Abstracts, selbst kann als Spezialisierung der allgemeineren Textzusammenfassung (TZF) aufgefasst werden, fokussiert jedoch primär auf Fach- und Sachtexte.
    Pages
    S.233-244
    Source
    Grundlagen der Informationswissenschaft. Hrsg.: Rainer Kuhlen, Dirk Lewandowski, Wolfgang Semar und Christa Womser-Hacker. 7., völlig neu gefasste Ausg
  10. Kuhlen, R.: Abstracts, abstracting : intellektuelle und maschinelle Verfahren (1997) 0.01 
    0.0064541018 = product of:
  0.04840576 = sum of:
    0.019866917 = weight(_text_:und in 7800) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.019866917 = score(doc=7800,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.04780656 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
          0.021569785 = queryNorm
        0.41556883 = fieldWeight in 7800, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
          0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=7800)
    0.0052914224 = weight(_text_:in in 7800) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0052914224 = score(doc=7800,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.029340398 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.021569785 = queryNorm
        0.18034597 = fieldWeight in 7800, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=7800)
    0.019866917 = weight(_text_:und in 7800) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.019866917 = score(doc=7800,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.04780656 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
          0.021569785 = queryNorm
        0.41556883 = fieldWeight in 7800, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
          0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=7800)
    0.0033805002 = weight(_text_:s in 7800) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0033805002 = score(doc=7800,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.023451481 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.0872376 = idf(docFreq=40523, maxDocs=44218)
          0.021569785 = queryNorm
        0.14414869 = fieldWeight in 7800, 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=7800)
  0.13333334 = coord(4/30)
    Pages
    S.88-119
    Source
    Grundlagen der praktischen Information und Dokumentation: ein Handbuch zur Einführung in die fachliche Informationsarbeit. 4. Aufl. Hrsg.: M. Buder u.a
  11. Ruda, S.: Abstracting: eine Auswahlbibliographie (1992) 0.01 
    0.0064374167 = product of:
  0.048280623 = sum of:
    0.020072797 = weight(_text_:und in 6603) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.020072797 = score(doc=6603,freq=12.0), product of:
        0.04780656 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
          0.021569785 = queryNorm
        0.41987535 = fieldWeight in 6603, product of:
          3.4641016 = tf(freq=12.0), with freq of:
            12.0 = termFreq=12.0
          2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=6603)
    0.0053462577 = weight(_text_:in in 6603) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0053462577 = score(doc=6603,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.029340398 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.021569785 = queryNorm
        0.1822149 = fieldWeight in 6603, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=6603)
    0.020072797 = weight(_text_:und in 6603) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.020072797 = score(doc=6603,freq=12.0), product of:
        0.04780656 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
          0.021569785 = queryNorm
        0.41987535 = fieldWeight in 6603, product of:
          3.4641016 = tf(freq=12.0), with freq of:
            12.0 = termFreq=12.0
          2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=6603)
    0.0027887707 = weight(_text_:s in 6603) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0027887707 = score(doc=6603,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.023451481 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.0872376 = idf(docFreq=40523, maxDocs=44218)
          0.021569785 = queryNorm
        0.118916616 = fieldWeight in 6603, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          1.0872376 = idf(docFreq=40523, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=6603)
  0.13333334 = coord(4/30)
    Abstract
    Die vorliegende Auswahlbibliographie ist in 9 Themenbereiche unterteilt. Der erste Abschnitt enthält Literatur, in der auf Abstracts und Abstracting-Verfahren allgemein eingegangen und ein Überblick über den Stand der Forschung gegeben wird. Im nächsten Abschnitt werden solche Aufsätze referiert, die die historische Entwicklung des Abstracting beschreiben. Im dritten Teil sind Abstracting-Richtlinien verschiedener Institutionen aufgelistet. Lexikalische, syntaktische und semantische Textkondensierungsverfahren sind das Thema der in Abschnitt 4 präsentierten Arbeiten. Textstrukturen von Abstracts werden unter Punkt 5 betrachtet, und die Arbeiten des nächsten Themenbereiches befassen sich mit dem Problem des Schreibens von Abstracts. Der siebte Abschnitt listet sog. 'maschinelle' und maschinen-unterstützte Abstracting-Methoden auf. Anschließend werden 'maschinelle' und maschinenunterstützte Abstracting-Verfahren, Abstracts im Vergleich zu ihren Primärtexten sowie Abstracts im allgemeien bewertet. Den Abschluß bilden Bibliographien
    Source
    Nachrichten für Dokumentation. 43(1992) H.5, S.283-292
  12. DIN 1426: Inhaltsangaben in Information und Dokumentation (1973) 0.01 
    0.005564581 = product of:
  0.055645812 = sum of:
    0.023413386 = weight(_text_:und in 688) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.023413386 = score(doc=688,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.04780656 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
          0.021569785 = queryNorm
        0.48975256 = fieldWeight in 688, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
          0.15625 = fieldNorm(doc=688)
    0.008819038 = weight(_text_:in in 688) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.008819038 = score(doc=688,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.029340398 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.021569785 = queryNorm
        0.30057663 = fieldWeight in 688, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.15625 = fieldNorm(doc=688)
    0.023413386 = weight(_text_:und in 688) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.023413386 = score(doc=688,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.04780656 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
          0.021569785 = queryNorm
        0.48975256 = fieldWeight in 688, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
          0.15625 = fieldNorm(doc=688)
  0.1 = coord(3/30)
  13. Borko, H.; Bernier, C.L.: Abstracting concepts and methods (1975) 0.01 
    0.005523211 = product of:
  0.055232108 = sum of:
    0.02648922 = weight(_text_:und in 929) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.02648922 = score(doc=929,freq=16.0), product of:
        0.04780656 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
          0.021569785 = queryNorm
        0.55409175 = fieldWeight in 929, product of:
          4.0 = tf(freq=16.0), with freq of:
            16.0 = termFreq=16.0
          2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=929)
    0.02648922 = weight(_text_:und in 929) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.02648922 = score(doc=929,freq=16.0), product of:
        0.04780656 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
          0.021569785 = queryNorm
        0.55409175 = fieldWeight in 929, product of:
          4.0 = tf(freq=16.0), with freq of:
            16.0 = termFreq=16.0
          2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=929)
    0.002253667 = weight(_text_:s in 929) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.002253667 = score(doc=929,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.023451481 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.0872376 = idf(docFreq=40523, maxDocs=44218)
          0.021569785 = queryNorm
        0.09609913 = fieldWeight in 929, 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=929)
  0.1 = coord(3/30)
    Classification
    ES 930 Allgemeine und vergleichende Sprach- und Literaturwissenschaft. Indogermanistik. Außereuropäische Sprachen und Literaturen / Spezialbereiche der allgemeinen Sprachwissenschaft / Datenverarbeitung und Sprachwissenschaft. Computerlinguistik / Informationsbehandlung
    Pages
    X, 250 S
    RVK
    ES 930 Allgemeine und vergleichende Sprach- und Literaturwissenschaft. Indogermanistik. Außereuropäische Sprachen und Literaturen / Spezialbereiche der allgemeinen Sprachwissenschaft / Datenverarbeitung und Sprachwissenschaft. Computerlinguistik / Informationsbehandlung
  14. Kuhlen, R.: Abstracts, abstracting : intellektuelle und maschinelle Verfahren (1990) 0.01 
    0.0050300057 = product of:
  0.050300054 = sum of:
    0.023178069 = weight(_text_:und in 2333) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.023178069 = score(doc=2333,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.04780656 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
          0.021569785 = queryNorm
        0.4848303 = fieldWeight in 2333, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
          0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=2333)
    0.023178069 = weight(_text_:und in 2333) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.023178069 = score(doc=2333,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.04780656 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
          0.021569785 = queryNorm
        0.4848303 = fieldWeight in 2333, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
          0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=2333)
    0.003943917 = weight(_text_:s in 2333) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.003943917 = score(doc=2333,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.023451481 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.0872376 = idf(docFreq=40523, maxDocs=44218)
          0.021569785 = queryNorm
        0.16817348 = fieldWeight in 2333, 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=2333)
  0.1 = coord(3/30)
    Pages
    S.90-121
    Source
    Grundlagen der praktischen Information und Dokumentation. 3. Aufl. Hrsg.: M. Buder u.a. Bd.1
  15. Endres-Niggemeyer, B.; Ziegert, C.: SummIt-BMT : (Summarize It in BMT) in Diagnose und Therapie, Abschlussbericht (2002) 0.00 
    0.0042391988 = product of:
  0.03179399 = sum of:
    0.011706693 = weight(_text_:und in 4497) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.011706693 = score(doc=4497,freq=8.0), product of:
        0.04780656 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
          0.021569785 = queryNorm
        0.24487628 = fieldWeight in 4497, product of:
          2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
            8.0 = termFreq=8.0
          2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4497)
    0.006972062 = weight(_text_:in in 4497) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.006972062 = score(doc=4497,freq=20.0), product of:
        0.029340398 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.021569785 = queryNorm
        0.2376267 = fieldWeight in 4497, product of:
          4.472136 = tf(freq=20.0), with freq of:
            20.0 = termFreq=20.0
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4497)
    0.011706693 = weight(_text_:und in 4497) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.011706693 = score(doc=4497,freq=8.0), product of:
        0.04780656 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
          0.021569785 = queryNorm
        0.24487628 = fieldWeight in 4497, product of:
          2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
            8.0 = termFreq=8.0
          2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4497)
    0.0014085418 = weight(_text_:s in 4497) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0014085418 = score(doc=4497,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.023451481 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.0872376 = idf(docFreq=40523, maxDocs=44218)
          0.021569785 = queryNorm
        0.060061958 = fieldWeight in 4497, 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=4497)
  0.13333334 = coord(4/30)
    Abstract
    SummIt-BMT (Summarize It in Bone Marrow Transplantation) - das Zielsystem des Projektes - soll Ärzten in der Knochenmarktransplantation durch kognitiv fundiertes Zusammenfassen (Endres-Niggemeyer, 1998) aus dem WWW eine schnelle Informationsaufnahme ermöglichen. Im bmbffinanzierten Teilprojekt, über das hier zu berichten ist, liegt der Schwerpunkt auf den klinischen Fragestellungen. SummIt-BMT hat als zentrale Komponente eine KMT-Ontologie. Den Systemablauf veranschaulicht Abb. 1: Benutzer geben ihren Informationsbedarf in ein strukturiertes Szenario ein. Sie ziehen dazu Begriffe aus der Ontologie heran. Aus dem Szenario werden Fragen an Suchmaschinen abgeleitet. Die Summit-BMT-Metasuchmaschine stößt Google an und sucht in Medline, der zentralen Literaturdatenbank der Medizin. Das Suchergebnis wird aufbereitet. Dabei werden Links zu Volltexten verfolgt und die Volltexte besorgt. Die beschafften Dokumente werden mit einem Schlüsselwortretrieval auf Passagen untersucht, in denen sich Suchkonzepte aus der Frage / Ontologie häufen. Diese Passagen werden zum Zusammenfassen vorgeschlagen. In ihnen werden die Aussagen syntaktisch analysiert. Die Systemagenten untersuchen sie. Lassen Aussagen sich mit einer semantischen Relation an die Frage anbinden, tragen also zur deren Beantwortung bei, werden sie in die Zusammenfassung aufgenommen, es sei denn, andere Agenten machen Hinderungsgründe geltend, z.B. Redundanz. Das Ergebnis der Zusammenfassung wird in das Frage/Antwort-Szenario integriert. Präsentiert werden Exzerpte aus den Quelldokumenten. Mit einem Link vermitteln sie einen sofortigen Rückgriff auf die Quelle. SummIt-BMT ist zum nächsten Durchgang von Informationssuche und Zusammenfassung bereit, sobald der Benutzer dies wünscht.
    Pages
    31 S
  16. Eimermacher, M.: Textverstehen im Projekt KIT : kognitive Verfahren zur Informationsextraktion und Zusammenfassung aus Texten (1983) 0.00 
    0.0036722657 = product of:
  0.036722656 = sum of:
    0.01638937 = weight(_text_:und in 449) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.01638937 = score(doc=449,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.04780656 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
          0.021569785 = queryNorm
        0.34282678 = fieldWeight in 449, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
          0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=449)
    0.01638937 = weight(_text_:und in 449) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.01638937 = score(doc=449,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.04780656 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
          0.021569785 = queryNorm
        0.34282678 = fieldWeight in 449, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
          0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=449)
    0.003943917 = weight(_text_:s in 449) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.003943917 = score(doc=449,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.023451481 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.0872376 = idf(docFreq=40523, maxDocs=44218)
          0.021569785 = queryNorm
        0.16817348 = fieldWeight in 449, 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=449)
  0.1 = coord(3/30)
    Pages
    S.327-344
  17. Koltay, T.: ¬A hypertext tutorial on abstracting for library science students (1995) 0.00 
    0.0021838644 = product of:
  0.021838643 = sum of:
    0.004409519 = weight(_text_:in in 3061) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.004409519 = score(doc=3061,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.029340398 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.021569785 = queryNorm
        0.15028831 = fieldWeight in 3061, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=3061)
    0.0028170836 = weight(_text_:s in 3061) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0028170836 = score(doc=3061,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.023451481 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.0872376 = idf(docFreq=40523, maxDocs=44218)
          0.021569785 = queryNorm
        0.120123915 = fieldWeight in 3061, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          1.0872376 = idf(docFreq=40523, maxDocs=44218)
          0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=3061)
    0.0146120405 = product of:
      0.029224081 = sum of:
        0.029224081 = weight(_text_:22 in 3061) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.029224081 = score(doc=3061,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.07553371 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.021569785 = queryNorm
            0.38690117 = fieldWeight in 3061, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=3061)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.1 = coord(3/30)
    Abstract
    Discusses briefly the application of hypertext in library user training with particular reference to a specific hypertext based tutorial designed to teach library school students the basics knowledge of abstracts and abstracting process
    Date
    27. 1.1996 18:22:06
    Source
    Journal of education for library and information science. 36(1995) no.2, S.170-173
  18. Wan, X.; Yang, J.; Xiao, J.: Incorporating cross-document relationships between sentences for single document summarizations (2006) 0.00 
    0.0018394608 = product of:
  0.018394608 = sum of:
    0.007937134 = weight(_text_:in in 2421) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.007937134 = score(doc=2421,freq=18.0), product of:
        0.029340398 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.021569785 = queryNorm
        0.27051896 = fieldWeight in 2421, product of:
          4.2426405 = tf(freq=18.0), with freq of:
            18.0 = termFreq=18.0
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2421)
    0.0016902501 = weight(_text_:s in 2421) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0016902501 = score(doc=2421,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.023451481 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.0872376 = idf(docFreq=40523, maxDocs=44218)
          0.021569785 = queryNorm
        0.072074346 = fieldWeight in 2421, 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=2421)
    0.008767224 = product of:
      0.017534448 = sum of:
        0.017534448 = weight(_text_:22 in 2421) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.017534448 = score(doc=2421,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.07553371 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.021569785 = queryNorm
            0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 2421, 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=2421)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.1 = coord(3/30)
    Abstract
    Graph-based ranking algorithms have recently been proposed for single document summarizations and such algorithms evaluate the importance of a sentence by making use of the relationships between sentences in the document in a recursive way. In this paper, we investigate using other related or relevant documents to improve summarization of one single document based on the graph-based ranking algorithm. In addition to the within-document relationships between sentences in the specified document, the cross-document relationships between sentences in different documents are also taken into account in the proposed approach. We evaluate the performance of the proposed approach on DUC 2002 data with the ROUGE metric and results demonstrate that the cross-document relationships between sentences in different but related documents can significantly improve the performance of single document summarization.
    Pages
    S.403-414
    Series
    Lecture notes in computer science; vol.4172
    Source
    Research and advanced technology for digital libraries : 10th European conference, proceedings / ECDL 2006, Alicante, Spain, September 17 - 22, 2006
  19. Palais, E.S.: Abstracting for reference librarians (1988) 0.00 
    0.0017470915 = product of:
  0.017470915 = sum of:
    0.003527615 = weight(_text_:in in 2832) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.003527615 = score(doc=2832,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.029340398 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.021569785 = queryNorm
        0.120230645 = fieldWeight in 2832, 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=2832)
    0.002253667 = weight(_text_:s in 2832) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.002253667 = score(doc=2832,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.023451481 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.0872376 = idf(docFreq=40523, maxDocs=44218)
          0.021569785 = queryNorm
        0.09609913 = fieldWeight in 2832, 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=2832)
    0.011689632 = product of:
      0.023379264 = sum of:
        0.023379264 = weight(_text_:22 in 2832) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.023379264 = score(doc=2832,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.07553371 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.021569785 = queryNorm
            0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 2832, 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=2832)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.1 = coord(3/30)
    Abstract
    Reference librarians, who are thoroughly familiar with the purpose, scope and arrangement of abstract periodicals, are uniquely qualified for the task of writing abstracts. The procedures described here offer a relatively simple way for them to write acceptable abstracts from the outset. Although research is being conducted in the area of machine generated abstracts, there wll continue to be a role for human abstractors.
    Source
    Reference librarian. 1988, no.22, S.297-308
  20. Hartley, J.; Betts, L.: Common weaknesses in traditional abstracts in the social sciences (2009) 0.00 
    0.0016703177 = product of:
  0.016703177 = sum of:
    0.007483202 = weight(_text_:in in 3115) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.007483202 = score(doc=3115,freq=16.0), product of:
        0.029340398 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.021569785 = queryNorm
        0.25504774 = fieldWeight in 3115, product of:
          4.0 = tf(freq=16.0), with freq of:
            16.0 = termFreq=16.0
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=3115)
    0.007529726 = product of:
      0.022589177 = sum of:
        0.022589177 = weight(_text_:l in 3115) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.022589177 = score(doc=3115,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.0857324 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.9746525 = idf(docFreq=2257, maxDocs=44218)
              0.021569785 = queryNorm
            0.26348472 = fieldWeight in 3115, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.9746525 = idf(docFreq=2257, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=3115)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    0.0016902501 = weight(_text_:s in 3115) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0016902501 = score(doc=3115,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.023451481 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.0872376 = idf(docFreq=40523, maxDocs=44218)
          0.021569785 = queryNorm
        0.072074346 = fieldWeight in 3115, 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=3115)
  0.1 = coord(3/30)
    Abstract
    Detailed checklists and questionnaires have been used in the past to assess the quality of structured abstracts in the medical sciences. The aim of this article is to report the findings when a simpler checklist was used to evaluate the quality of 100 traditional abstracts published in 53 different social science journals. Most of these abstracts contained information about the aims, methods, and results of the studies. However, many did not report details about the sample sizes, ages, or sexes of the participants, or where the research was carried out. The correlation between the lengths of the abstracts and the amount of information present was 0.37 (p < .001), suggesting that word limits for abstracts may restrict the presence of key information to some extent. We conclude that authors can improve the quality of information in traditional abstracts in the social sciences by using the simple checklist provided in this article.
    Source
    Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 60(2009) no.10, S.2010-2018

Authors

Years

Languages

  • e 61
  • d 24
  • f 1
  • More… Less…

Types

  • a 68
  • m 11
  • r 3
  • s 2
  • b 1
  • el 1
  • n 1
  • More… Less…

Themes

Subjects

Classifications