Search (1109 results, page 56 of 56)

3.4916753E-4 = product of:
  0.006634183 = sum of:
    0.006634183 = product of:
      0.013268366 = sum of:
        0.013268366 = weight(_text_:22 in 1163) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.013268366 = score(doc=1163,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.08573486 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.024482876 = queryNorm
            0.15476047 = fieldWeight in 1163, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=1163)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.05263158 = coord(1/19)

Source

Proceedings of the Fourth Workshop on Link Analysis, Counterterrorism, and Security, SIAM Data Mining Conference, Bethesda, MD, 20-22 April, 2006. [http://www.siam.org/meetings/sdm06/workproceed/Link%20Analysis/15.pdf]

3.4916753E-4 = product of:
  0.006634183 = sum of:
    0.006634183 = product of:
      0.013268366 = sum of:
        0.013268366 = weight(_text_:22 in 3608) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.013268366 = score(doc=3608,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.08573486 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.024482876 = queryNorm
            0.15476047 = fieldWeight in 3608, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=3608)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.05263158 = coord(1/19)

Abstract

You were going to get one-click access to the full text of nearly every book that's ever been published. Books still in print you'd have to pay for, but everything else-a collection slated to grow larger than the holdings at the Library of Congress, Harvard, the University of Michigan, at any of the great national libraries of Europe-would have been available for free at terminals that were going to be placed in every local library that wanted one. At the terminal you were going to be able to search tens of millions of books and read every page of any book you found. You'd be able to highlight passages and make annotations and share them; for the first time, you'd be able to pinpoint an idea somewhere inside the vastness of the printed record, and send somebody straight to it with a link. Books would become as instantly available, searchable, copy-pasteable-as alive in the digital world-as web pages. It was to be the realization of a long-held dream. "The universal library has been talked about for millennia," Richard Ovenden, the head of Oxford's Bodleian Libraries, has said. "It was possible to think in the Renaissance that you might be able to amass the whole of published knowledge in a single room or a single institution." In the spring of 2011, it seemed we'd amassed it in a terminal small enough to fit on a desk. "This is a watershed event and can serve as a catalyst for the reinvention of education, research, and intellectual life," one eager observer wrote at the time. On March 22 of that year, however, the legal agreement that would have unlocked a century's worth of books and peppered the country with access terminals to a universal library was rejected under Rule 23(e)(2) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure by the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York. When the library at Alexandria burned it was said to be an "international catastrophe." When the most significant humanities project of our time was dismantled in court, the scholars, archivists, and librarians who'd had a hand in its undoing breathed a sigh of relief, for they believed, at the time, that they had narrowly averted disaster.

2.797417E-4 = product of:
  0.0053150924 = sum of:
    0.0053150924 = weight(_text_:und in 3453) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0053150924 = score(doc=3453,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.05426304 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
          0.024482876 = queryNorm
        0.09795051 = fieldWeight in 3453, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=3453)
  0.05263158 = coord(1/19)

Abstract

Mit nicht völlig neuen, aber überarbeiteten Suchfunktionen erweitert das zum Firmenimperium des US-Medienzaren Barry Diller gehörende Unternehmen Ask Jeeves das Leistungsspektrum seiner Suchmaschine. Mit der Ergebnisverfeinerungsfunktion Focus erhält der Suchende auf der rechten oberen Bildschirmseite eine Liste, die das Thema seiner Suche thematisch aufgliedern soll. Eine zweite Neuerung verspricht präzise Antworten auf als Fragen formulierte Sucheinträge. So ergibt der Eintrag "Lady Diana" zum Beispiel eine Liste mit den Items Princess Di, Princess Dianas Life, Princess Diana's Wedding. Interessant dabei ist, dass diese Liste nicht einfach aus einem monolithischen Block von Schlüsselwörtern besteht, sondern in drei Kategorien aufgeteilt ist: "Narrow Your Search", "Expand Your Search" und "Related Names". Waren die eben genannten Beispiele aus der ersten Kategorie, finden sich unter Expand Your Search Einträge wie Royal Family, Princess Di Ring, Princess Di Prince Charles History oder Prince William Harry, allerdings auch Who Is Louis De Funes? "Related Names" verweist auf Einträge wie Diana Spencer, Prince Harry oder Imran Khan. Die Suchfunktion soll also die thematische Verfeinerung oder Ausweitung gleichermaßen wie die Fortsetzung der Suche mit einem verwandten Thema ermöglichen. Auf die Frage "who invented the telephone" erhält der Suchende als ersten Eintrag die Antwort "The telephone was invented by Alexander Graham Bell" mit dem roten Vermerk "Web Answer'. Bemerkenswert ist hier, dass auf eine Frage nicht nur eine passende Webseite mit der Antwort angezeigt wird, sondern die ausformulierte Antwort direkt aus der vorgeschlagenen Webseite zitiert wird. Die Frage "who is the mother of Albert Einstein" gibt immerhin einen Eintrag unter "Narrow Your Search" mit "Albert Einstein Family tree". Ask Jeeves wird wohl noch eine weitere Neuerung bevorstehen: Auf einer Pressekonferenz in San Francisco bemerkte Chief Executive Barry Diller, dass das Unternehmen über eine Namensänderung von Ask Jeeves nachdenke. Wahrscheinlich werde auf eines der beiden Worte verzichtet werden. Mit dem Sucheintrag "How will Ask Jeeves be called in the future" erhält man bislang jedoch noch keine "Web Answer". (26.05.2005 15:30)

2.797417E-4 = product of:
  0.0053150924 = sum of:
    0.0053150924 = weight(_text_:und in 1206) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0053150924 = score(doc=1206,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.05426304 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
          0.024482876 = queryNorm
        0.09795051 = fieldWeight in 1206, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=1206)
  0.05263158 = coord(1/19)

Theme

Konzeption und Anwendung des Prinzips Thesaurus

2.797417E-4 = product of:
  0.0053150924 = sum of:
    0.0053150924 = weight(_text_:und in 4639) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0053150924 = score(doc=4639,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.05426304 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
          0.024482876 = queryNorm
        0.09795051 = fieldWeight in 4639, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=4639)
  0.05263158 = coord(1/19)

Theme

Konzeption und Anwendung des Prinzips Thesaurus

2.6187566E-4 = product of:
  0.0049756374 = sum of:
    0.0049756374 = product of:
      0.009951275 = sum of:
        0.009951275 = weight(_text_:22 in 1184) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.009951275 = score(doc=1184,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.08573486 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.024482876 = queryNorm
            0.116070345 = fieldWeight in 1184, 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=1184)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.05263158 = coord(1/19)

Date

26.12.2011 14:08:22

2.6187566E-4 = product of:
  0.0049756374 = sum of:
    0.0049756374 = product of:
      0.009951275 = sum of:
        0.009951275 = weight(_text_:22 in 3035) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.009951275 = score(doc=3035,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.08573486 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.024482876 = 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)
  0.05263158 = coord(1/19)

Content

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.

2.44774E-4 = product of:
  0.004650706 = sum of:
    0.004650706 = weight(_text_:und in 2362) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.004650706 = score(doc=2362,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.05426304 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
          0.024482876 = queryNorm
        0.085706696 = fieldWeight in 2362, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
          0.02734375 = fieldNorm(doc=2362)
  0.05263158 = coord(1/19)

Theme

Konzeption und Anwendung des Prinzips Thesaurus

2.44774E-4 = product of:
  0.004650706 = sum of:
    0.004650706 = weight(_text_:und in 1800) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.004650706 = score(doc=1800,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.05426304 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
          0.024482876 = queryNorm
        0.085706696 = fieldWeight in 1800, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
          0.02734375 = fieldNorm(doc=1800)
  0.05263158 = coord(1/19)

Theme

Konzeption und Anwendung des Prinzips Thesaurus