Search (167 results, page 1 of 9)

0.06611619 = product of:
  0.13223238 = sum of:
    0.13223238 = product of:
      0.39669713 = sum of:
        0.39669713 = weight(_text_:3a in 1826) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.39669713 = score(doc=1826,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.42350647 = queryWeight, product of:
              8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
              0.049953517 = queryNorm
            0.93669677 = fieldWeight in 1826, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
              0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=1826)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Source

http://www.google.de/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=5&ved=0CDQQFjAE&url=http%3A%2F%2Fdigbib.ubka.uni-karlsruhe.de%2Fvolltexte%2Fdocuments%2F3131107&ei=HzFWVYvGMsiNsgGTyoFI&usg=AFQjCNE2FHUeR9oQTQlNC4TPedv4Mo3DaQ&sig2=Rlzpr7a3BLZZkqZCXXN_IA&bvm=bv.93564037,d.bGg&cad=rja

0.059290636 = product of:
  0.11858127 = sum of:
    0.11858127 = product of:
      0.23716255 = sum of:
        0.23716255 = weight(_text_:400 in 5368) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.23716255 = score(doc=5368,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.32745647 = queryWeight, product of:
              6.5552235 = idf(docFreq=170, maxDocs=44218)
              0.049953517 = queryNorm
            0.7242567 = fieldWeight in 5368, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              6.5552235 = idf(docFreq=170, maxDocs=44218)
              0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=5368)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Content

Über 50.000 Stichwörter; über 90 Min Videos; 2.200 Fotos, Diagramme, Grafiken und Zeichnungen; 90 Min. Musik, Tierstimmen, Redewendungen; Lexikon-Quiz mit 400 Fragen

0.052892953 = product of:
  0.10578591 = sum of:
    0.10578591 = product of:
      0.31735772 = sum of:
        0.31735772 = weight(_text_:3a in 230) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.31735772 = score(doc=230,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.42350647 = queryWeight, product of:
              8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
              0.049953517 = queryNorm
            0.7493574 = fieldWeight in 230, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=230)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Source

https%3A%2F%2Ftannerlectures.utah.edu%2F_documents%2Fa-to-z%2Fp%2Fpopper80.pdf&usg=AOvVaw3f4QRTEH-OEBmoYr2J_c7H

0.04743251 = product of:
  0.09486502 = sum of:
    0.09486502 = product of:
      0.18973003 = sum of:
        0.18973003 = weight(_text_:400 in 5484) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.18973003 = score(doc=5484,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.32745647 = queryWeight, product of:
              6.5552235 = idf(docFreq=170, maxDocs=44218)
              0.049953517 = queryNorm
            0.57940537 = fieldWeight in 5484, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              6.5552235 = idf(docFreq=170, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=5484)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Content

1.000 vierfarbige Illustrationen; über 120 Erfinderbiographien; mehr als 400 Animationen; 60 Min. Ton; Zeitleiste mit den Maschinen und ihren Erfindern

0.045726404 = product of:
  0.09145281 = sum of:
    0.09145281 = sum of:
      0.07114877 = weight(_text_:400 in 3035) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.07114877 = score(doc=3035,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.32745647 = queryWeight, product of:
            6.5552235 = idf(docFreq=170, maxDocs=44218)
            0.049953517 = queryNorm
          0.21727702 = fieldWeight in 3035, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            6.5552235 = idf(docFreq=170, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0234375 = fieldNorm(doc=3035)
      0.020304035 = weight(_text_:22 in 3035) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.020304035 = score(doc=3035,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.17492871 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.049953517 = queryNorm
          0.116070345 = fieldWeight in 3035, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0234375 = fieldNorm(doc=3035)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Content

Bill Howe and his colleagues at the University of Washington, in Seattle, decided to find out. First, they trained a computer algorithm to distinguish between various sorts of figures-which they defined as diagrams, equations, photographs, plots (such as bar charts and scatter graphs) and tables. They exposed their algorithm to between 400 and 600 images of each of these types of figure until it could distinguish them with an accuracy greater than 90%. Then they set it loose on the more-than-650,000 papers (containing more than 10m figures) stored on PubMed Central, an online archive of biomedical-research articles. To measure each paper's influence, they calculated its article-level Eigenfactor score-a modified version of the PageRank algorithm Google uses to provide the most relevant results for internet searches. Eigenfactor scoring gives a better measure than simply noting the number of times a paper is cited elsewhere, because it weights citations by their influence. A citation in a paper that is itself highly cited is worth more than one in a paper that is not.
As the team describe in a paper posted (http://arxiv.org/abs/1605.04951) on arXiv, they found that figures did indeed matter-but not all in the same way. An average paper in PubMed Central has about one diagram for every three pages and gets 1.67 citations. Papers with more diagrams per page and, to a lesser extent, plots per page tended to be more influential (on average, a paper accrued two more citations for every extra diagram per page, and one more for every extra plot per page). By contrast, including photographs and equations seemed to decrease the chances of a paper being cited by others. That agrees with a study from 2012, whose authors counted (by hand) the number of mathematical expressions in over 600 biology papers and found that each additional equation per page reduced the number of citations a paper received by 22%. This does not mean that researchers should rush to include more diagrams in their next paper. Dr Howe has not shown what is behind the effect, which may merely be one of correlation, rather than causation. It could, for example, be that papers with lots of diagrams tend to be those that illustrate new concepts, and thus start a whole new field of inquiry. Such papers will certainly be cited a lot. On the other hand, the presence of equations really might reduce citations. Biologists (as are most of those who write and read the papers in PubMed Central) are notoriously mathsaverse. If that is the case, looking in a physics archive would probably produce a different result.

0.03810533 = product of:
  0.07621066 = sum of:
    0.07621066 = sum of:
      0.059290636 = weight(_text_:400 in 4610) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.059290636 = score(doc=4610,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.32745647 = queryWeight, product of:
            6.5552235 = idf(docFreq=170, maxDocs=44218)
            0.049953517 = queryNorm
          0.18106417 = fieldWeight in 4610, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            6.5552235 = idf(docFreq=170, maxDocs=44218)
            0.01953125 = fieldNorm(doc=4610)
      0.01692003 = weight(_text_:22 in 4610) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.01692003 = score(doc=4610,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.17492871 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.049953517 = queryNorm
          0.09672529 = fieldWeight in 4610, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.01953125 = fieldNorm(doc=4610)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Content

"Ein universelles Netzwerk, das die Verbreitung von Wissen erlaubt." In seinem 400 Seiten dicken Buch "Traité de documentation" sammelte er all diese Ideen. Er skizzierte eine wissenschaftliche Konferenz, die per Telefon übertragen werden sollte und spann die Idee weiter - warum nicht auch mit Bildübertragung? "Radiotelefotografie"! Grammophone sollten gesprochene Informationen archivierbar und reproduzierbar machen. "Kürzlich haben wir einen Text aus dem Jahr 1907 gefunden, in dem er von einem mobilen Telefon spricht", sagt der Archivar Gillen, während er behutsam die dünnen Original-Skizzen Otlets von all diesen Visionen wieder einpackt. Besonders das neue Medium Radio faszinierte Otlet - ermöglichte es doch, Informationen kabellos über weite Strecken zu versenden und dabei beliebig viele Empfänger zu erreichen. Für ihn ein kleiner Schritt zu seinem Traum, den er 1934 formulierte: einem "universellen Netzwerk, das die Verbreitung von Wissen ohne Beschränkung erlaubt." Jeder Mensch würde "im Sessel" auf den aktuellen Stand des Weltwissens zugreifen können, "applaudieren, Ovationen geben und im Chor singen." Alle weltweiten Entwicklungen würden aufgezeichnet werden, sobald sie entstünden: "So entsteht ein bewegliches Bild der Welt - ihr Gedächtnis, ihr wahres Duplikat." Ein "mechanisches, kollektives Gehirn".

Date

24.10.2008 14:19:22

0.035574384 = product of:
  0.07114877 = sum of:
    0.07114877 = product of:
      0.14229754 = sum of:
        0.14229754 = weight(_text_:400 in 4667) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.14229754 = score(doc=4667,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.32745647 = queryWeight, product of:
              6.5552235 = idf(docFreq=170, maxDocs=44218)
              0.049953517 = queryNorm
            0.43455404 = fieldWeight in 4667, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              6.5552235 = idf(docFreq=170, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4667)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

Ein 19-Jähriger programmiert einen Algorithmus, der Gemälde malt. Ein Künstlergruppe nutzt ihn und verkauft das Ergebnis - für mehr als 400 000 Dollar. Gretchenfrage: Wer ist der Urheber? Am 25. Oktober war der 19-jährige Robbie Barrat aktiver auf seinem Twitteraccount als sonst. Barrat, er nennt sich in der Netzwelt "@DrBeef_", knallte die Timeline mit seinen Posts zu, jedenfalls für seine Verhältnisse. Denn an diesem Tag wurde beim Auktionshaus Christie's in New York ein Porträt versteigert, das glasklar der Pariser Künstlergruppe "Obvious" zugerechnet wird - wobei es irritierenderweise in einem Stil verfertigt ist, den unzählige Porträts aufweisen, die wiederum allesamt glasklar Robbie Barrat zugeordnet werden. Das in New York gehandelte Bild zeigt auf den ersten Blick einen Herrn des frühen 20. Jahrhunderts, einen "Edmond de Belamy". Das so betitelte Bild, das etwas vom dynamischen Furor und der Aufbruchstimmung der damals noch jungen Avantgarde vermittelt, hat etwas Skizzenhaftes. Etwas Verwaschenes und Probehaftes, auch wenn man einen Naturalismus spüren kann. Sagen wir so: Als Kunstwerk ist es keine Offenbarung, es wirkt eher derangiert in seiner unklaren Dimensionierung. Aber ganz misslungen ist es auch nicht.

0.033058096 = product of:
  0.06611619 = sum of:
    0.06611619 = product of:
      0.19834857 = sum of:
        0.19834857 = weight(_text_:3a in 4388) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.19834857 = score(doc=4388,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.42350647 = queryWeight, product of:
              8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
              0.049953517 = queryNorm
            0.46834838 = fieldWeight in 4388, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4388)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Footnote

Vgl. unter: https://www.google.de/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=2&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=2ahUKEwizweHljdbcAhVS16QKHXcFD9QQFjABegQICRAB&url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.researchgate.net%2Fpublication%2F271200105_Die_Autonomie_des_Menschen_und_der_Maschine_-_gegenwartige_Definitionen_von_Autonomie_zwischen_philosophischem_Hintergrund_und_technologischer_Umsetzbarkeit_Redigierte_Version_der_Magisterarbeit_Karls&usg=AOvVaw06orrdJmFF2xbCCp_hL26q.

0.033058096 = product of:
  0.06611619 = sum of:
    0.06611619 = product of:
      0.19834857 = sum of:
        0.19834857 = weight(_text_:3a in 5669) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.19834857 = score(doc=5669,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.42350647 = queryWeight, product of:
              8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
              0.049953517 = queryNorm
            0.46834838 = fieldWeight in 5669, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=5669)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Content

"Die Englischsprachige Wikipedia verfügt jetzt über mehr als 6 Millionen Artikel. An zweiter Stelle kommt die deutschsprachige Wikipedia mit 2.3 Millionen Artikeln, an dritter Stelle steht die französischsprachige Wikipedia mit 2.1 Millionen Artikeln (via Researchbuzz: Firehose <https://rbfirehose.com/2020/01/24/techcrunch-wikipedia-now-has-more-than-6-million-articles-in-english/> und Techcrunch <https://techcrunch.com/2020/01/23/wikipedia-english-six-million-articles/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+Techcrunch+%28TechCrunch%29&guccounter=1&guce_referrer=aHR0cHM6Ly9yYmZpcmVob3NlLmNvbS8yMDIwLzAxLzI0L3RlY2hjcnVuY2gtd2lraXBlZGlhLW5vdy1oYXMtbW9yZS10aGFuLTYtbWlsbGlvbi1hcnRpY2xlcy1pbi1lbmdsaXNoLw&guce_referrer_sig=AQAAAK0zHfjdDZ_spFZBF_z-zDjtL5iWvuKDumFTzm4HvQzkUfE2pLXQzGS6FGB_y-VISdMEsUSvkNsg2U_NWQ4lwWSvOo3jvXo1I3GtgHpP8exukVxYAnn5mJspqX50VHIWFADHhs5AerkRn3hMRtf_R3F1qmEbo8EROZXp328HMC-o>). 250120 via digithek ch = #fineBlog s.a.: Angesichts der Veröffentlichung des 6-millionsten Artikels vergangene Woche in der englischsprachigen Wikipedia hat die Community-Zeitungsseite "Wikipedia Signpost" ein Moratorium bei der Veröffentlichung von Unternehmensartikeln gefordert. Das sei kein Vorwurf gegen die Wikimedia Foundation, aber die derzeitigen Maßnahmen, um die Enzyklopädie gegen missbräuchliches undeklariertes Paid Editing zu schützen, funktionierten ganz klar nicht. *"Da die ehrenamtlichen Autoren derzeit von Werbung in Gestalt von Wikipedia-Artikeln überwältigt werden, und da die WMF nicht in der Lage zu sein scheint, dem irgendetwas entgegenzusetzen, wäre der einzige gangbare Weg für die Autoren, fürs erste die Neuanlage von Artikeln über Unternehmen zu untersagen"*, schreibt der Benutzer Smallbones in seinem Editorial <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Wikipedia_Signpost/2020-01-27/From_the_editor> zur heutigen Ausgabe."

0.02934737 = product of:
  0.05869474 = sum of:
    0.05869474 = product of:
      0.11738948 = sum of:
        0.11738948 = weight(_text_:400 in 1263) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.11738948 = score(doc=1263,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.32745647 = queryWeight, product of:
              6.5552235 = idf(docFreq=170, maxDocs=44218)
              0.049953517 = queryNorm
            0.3584888 = fieldWeight in 1263, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              6.5552235 = idf(docFreq=170, maxDocs=44218)
              0.02734375 = fieldNorm(doc=1263)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

The Internet would not be very useful if communication were limited to textual exchanges between speakers of English located in the United States. Rather, its value lies in its ability to enable people from multiple nations, speaking multiple languages, to employ multiple media in interacting with each other. While computer networks broke through national boundaries long ago, they remain much more effective for textual communication than for exchanges of sound, images, or mixed media -- and more effective for communication in English than for exchanges in most other languages, much less interactions involving multiple languages. Supporting searching and display in multiple languages is an increasingly important issue for all digital libraries accessible on the Internet. Even if a digital library contains materials in only one language, the content needs to be searchable and displayable on computers in countries speaking other languages. We need to exchange data between digital libraries, whether in a single language or in multiple languages. Data exchanges may be large batch updates or interactive hyperlinks. In any of these cases, character sets must be represented in a consistent manner if exchanges are to succeed. Issues of interoperability, portability, and data exchange related to multi-lingual character sets have received surprisingly little attention in the digital library community or in discussions of standards for information infrastructure, except in Europe. The landmark collection of papers on Standards Policy for Information Infrastructure, for example, contains no discussion of multi-lingual issues except for a passing reference to the Unicode standard. The goal of this short essay is to draw attention to the multi-lingual issues involved in designing digital libraries accessible on the Internet. Many of the multi-lingual design issues parallel those of multi-media digital libraries, a topic more familiar to most readers of D-Lib Magazine. This essay draws examples from multi-media DLs to illustrate some of the urgent design challenges in creating a globally distributed network serving people who speak many languages other than English. First we introduce some general issues of medium, culture, and language, then discuss the design challenges in the transition from local to global systems, lastly addressing technical matters. The technical issues involve the choice of character sets to represent languages, similar to the choices made in representing images or sound. However, the scale of the language problem is far greater. Standards for multi-media representation are being adopted fairly rapidly, in parallel with the availability of multi-media content in electronic form. By contrast, we have hundreds (and sometimes thousands) of years worth of textual materials in hundreds of languages, created long before data encoding standards existed. Textual content from past and present is being encoded in language and application-specific representations that are difficult to exchange without losing data -- if they exchange at all. We illustrate the multi-language DL challenge with examples drawn from the research library community, which typically handles collections of materials in 400 or so languages. These are problems faced not only by developers of digital libraries, but by those who develop and manage any communication technology that crosses national or linguistic boundaries.

0.027072048 = product of:
  0.054144096 = sum of:
    0.054144096 = product of:
      0.10828819 = sum of:
        0.10828819 = weight(_text_:22 in 5449) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.10828819 = score(doc=5449,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17492871 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.049953517 = queryNorm
            0.61904186 = fieldWeight in 5449, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.125 = fieldNorm(doc=5449)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Date

22. 2.1997 19:26:34

0.027072048 = product of:
  0.054144096 = sum of:
    0.054144096 = product of:
      0.10828819 = sum of:
        0.10828819 = weight(_text_:22 in 5837) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.10828819 = score(doc=5837,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17492871 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.049953517 = queryNorm
            0.61904186 = fieldWeight in 5837, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.125 = fieldNorm(doc=5837)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Date

30.11.1996 13:22:37

0.027072048 = product of:
  0.054144096 = sum of:
    0.054144096 = product of:
      0.10828819 = sum of:
        0.10828819 = weight(_text_:22 in 4085) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.10828819 = score(doc=4085,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17492871 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.049953517 = queryNorm
            0.61904186 = fieldWeight in 4085, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.125 = fieldNorm(doc=4085)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Date

7.11.1999 18:22:39

0.026484037 = product of:
  0.052968074 = sum of:
    0.052968074 = product of:
      0.10593615 = sum of:
        0.10593615 = weight(_text_:22 in 1936) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.10593615 = score(doc=1936,freq=10.0), product of:
            0.17492871 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.049953517 = queryNorm
            0.6055961 = fieldWeight in 1936, product of:
              3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
                10.0 = termFreq=10.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=1936)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

Dewey Decimal Classification and Relative Index, Edition 22 (DDC 22) will be issued simultaneously in print and web versions in July 2003. The new edition is the first full print update to the Dewey Decimal Classification system in seven years-it includes several significant updates and many new numbers and topics. DDC 22 also features some fundamental structural changes that have been introduced with the goals of promoting classifier efficiency and improving the DDC for use in a variety of applications in the web environment. Most importantly, the content of the new edition has been shaped by the needs and recommendations of Dewey users around the world. The worldwide user community has an important role in shaping the future of the DDC.

Object

DDC-22

0.023928536 = product of:
  0.047857072 = sum of:
    0.047857072 = product of:
      0.095714144 = sum of:
        0.095714144 = weight(_text_:22 in 3925) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.095714144 = score(doc=3925,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.17492871 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.049953517 = queryNorm
            0.54716086 = fieldWeight in 3925, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=3925)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Date

22. 7.2006 15:22:28

0.023928536 = product of:
  0.047857072 = sum of:
    0.047857072 = product of:
      0.095714144 = sum of:
        0.095714144 = weight(_text_:22 in 3582) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.095714144 = score(doc=3582,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.17492871 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.049953517 = queryNorm
            0.54716086 = fieldWeight in 3582, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=3582)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Date

22. 4.2017 10:42:05
22. 4.2017 10:48:38

0.023716254 = product of:
  0.04743251 = sum of:
    0.04743251 = product of:
      0.09486502 = sum of:
        0.09486502 = weight(_text_:400 in 4040) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.09486502 = score(doc=4040,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.32745647 = queryWeight, product of:
              6.5552235 = idf(docFreq=170, maxDocs=44218)
              0.049953517 = queryNorm
            0.28970268 = fieldWeight in 4040, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              6.5552235 = idf(docFreq=170, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=4040)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

Today's semantic web deals with meaning in a very restricted sense and offers static solutions. This is adequate for many scientific, technical purposes and for business transactions requiring machine-to-machine communication, but does not answer the needs of culture. Science, technology and business are concerned primarily with the latest findings, the state of the art, i.e. the paradigm or dominant world-view of the day. In this context, history is considered non-essential because it deals with things that are out of date. By contrast, culture faces a much larger challenge, namely, to re-present changes in ways of knowing; changing meanings in different places at a given time (synchronically) and over time (diachronically). Culture is about both objects and the commentaries on them; about a cumulative body of knowledge; about collective memory and heritage. Here, history plays a central role and older does not mean less important or less relevant. Hence, a Leonardo painting that is 400 years old, or a Greek statue that is 2500 years old, typically have richer commentaries and are often more valuable than their contemporary equivalents. In this context, the science of meaning (semantics) is necessarily much more complex than semantic primitives. A semantic web in the cultural domain must enable us to trace how meaning and knowledge organisation have evolved historically in different cultures. This paper examines five issues to address this challenge: 1) different world-views (i.e. a shift from substance to function and from ontology to multiple ontologies); 2) developments in definitions and meaning; 3) distinctions between words and concepts; 4) new classes of relations; and 5) dynamic models of knowledge organisation. These issues reveal that historical dimensions of cultural diversity in knowledge organisation are also central to classification of biological diversity. New ways are proposed of visualizing knowledge using a time/space horizon to distinguish between universals and particulars. It is suggested that new visualization methods make possible a history of questions as well as of answers, thus enabling dynamic access to cultural and historical dimensions of knowledge. Unlike earlier media, which were limited to recording factual dimensions of collective memory, digital media enable us to explore theories, ways of perceiving, ways of knowing; to enter into other mindsets and world-views and thus to attain novel insights and new levels of tolerance. Some practical consequences are outlined.

0.023688043 = product of:
  0.047376085 = sum of:
    0.047376085 = product of:
      0.09475217 = sum of:
        0.09475217 = weight(_text_:22 in 8365) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.09475217 = score(doc=8365,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17492871 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.049953517 = queryNorm
            0.5416616 = fieldWeight in 8365, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=8365)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Date

22. 6.2015 16:08:38

0.023688043 = product of:
  0.047376085 = sum of:
    0.047376085 = product of:
      0.09475217 = sum of:
        0.09475217 = weight(_text_:22 in 4084) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.09475217 = score(doc=4084,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17492871 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.049953517 = queryNorm
            0.5416616 = fieldWeight in 4084, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=4084)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Date

7.11.1999 18:22:54

0.023688043 = product of:
  0.047376085 = sum of:
    0.047376085 = product of:
      0.09475217 = sum of:
        0.09475217 = weight(_text_:22 in 6021) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.09475217 = score(doc=6021,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17492871 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.049953517 = queryNorm
            0.5416616 = fieldWeight in 6021, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=6021)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Source

Ariadne. 1999, no.22