-
Saarti, J.: Consistency of subject indexing of novels by public library professionals and patrons (2002)
0.01
0.013560129 = product of:
0.105091006 = sum of:
0.043437775 = weight(_text_:literatur in 4473) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.043437775 = score(doc=4473,freq=2.0), product of:
0.102594726 = queryWeight, product of:
4.7901325 = idf(docFreq=998, maxDocs=44218)
0.02141793 = queryNorm
0.42339188 = fieldWeight in 4473, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
4.7901325 = idf(docFreq=998, maxDocs=44218)
0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=4473)
0.043437775 = weight(_text_:literatur in 4473) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.043437775 = score(doc=4473,freq=2.0), product of:
0.102594726 = queryWeight, product of:
4.7901325 = idf(docFreq=998, maxDocs=44218)
0.02141793 = queryNorm
0.42339188 = fieldWeight in 4473, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
4.7901325 = idf(docFreq=998, maxDocs=44218)
0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=4473)
0.014304262 = weight(_text_:20 in 4473) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.014304262 = score(doc=4473,freq=2.0), product of:
0.05887406 = queryWeight, product of:
2.748821 = idf(docFreq=7692, maxDocs=44218)
0.02141793 = queryNorm
0.24296375 = fieldWeight in 4473, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
2.748821 = idf(docFreq=7692, maxDocs=44218)
0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=4473)
0.0039111963 = weight(_text_:e in 4473) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.0039111963 = score(doc=4473,freq=2.0), product of:
0.03078549 = queryWeight, product of:
1.43737 = idf(docFreq=28552, maxDocs=44218)
0.02141793 = queryNorm
0.12704675 = fieldWeight in 4473, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
1.43737 = idf(docFreq=28552, maxDocs=44218)
0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=4473)
0.12903225 = coord(4/31)
- Date
- 10. 3.1997 20:31:13
- Language
- e
- Theme
- Schöne Literatur
-
Ladewig, C.; Rieger, M.: Ähnlichkeitsmessung mit und ohne aspektische Indexierung (1998)
0.01
0.005158158 = product of:
0.05330097 = sum of:
0.020794136 = weight(_text_:und in 2526) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.020794136 = score(doc=2526,freq=10.0), product of:
0.047469996 = queryWeight, product of:
2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
0.02141793 = queryNorm
0.438048 = fieldWeight in 2526, product of:
3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
10.0 = termFreq=10.0
2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=2526)
0.011712699 = product of:
0.023425398 = sum of:
0.023425398 = weight(_text_:29 in 2526) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.023425398 = score(doc=2526,freq=2.0), product of:
0.07534158 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
0.02141793 = queryNorm
0.31092256 = fieldWeight in 2526, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=2526)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.020794136 = weight(_text_:und in 2526) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.020794136 = score(doc=2526,freq=10.0), product of:
0.047469996 = queryWeight, product of:
2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
0.02141793 = queryNorm
0.438048 = fieldWeight in 2526, product of:
3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
10.0 = termFreq=10.0
2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=2526)
0.09677419 = coord(3/31)
- Abstract
- Für eine fiktive Dokumentmenge wird eine Dokument-Wort-Matrix erstellt und mittels zweier Suchanfragen, ebenfalls als Matrix dargestellt, die Retrievalergebnisse ermittelt. Den Wörtern der Dokumentmenge werden in einem zweiten Schritt Aspekte zugeordnet und die Untersuchung erneut durchgeführt. Ein Vergleich bestätigt die schon früher gefundenen Vorteile des aspektischen Indexierung gegenüber anderen Methoden der Retrievalverbesserung, wie Trunkierung und Controlled Terms
- Date
- 4. 1.1999 19:31:29
- Source
- nfd Information - Wissenschaft und Praxis. 49(1998) H.8, S.459-462
-
Chen, X.: Indexing consistency between online catalogues (2008)
0.00
0.0029920687 = product of:
0.030918043 = sum of:
0.014236772 = weight(_text_:und in 2209) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.014236772 = score(doc=2209,freq=12.0), product of:
0.047469996 = queryWeight, product of:
2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
0.02141793 = queryNorm
0.29991096 = fieldWeight in 2209, product of:
3.4641016 = tf(freq=12.0), with freq of:
12.0 = termFreq=12.0
2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2209)
0.0024444978 = weight(_text_:e in 2209) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.0024444978 = score(doc=2209,freq=2.0), product of:
0.03078549 = queryWeight, product of:
1.43737 = idf(docFreq=28552, maxDocs=44218)
0.02141793 = queryNorm
0.07940422 = fieldWeight in 2209, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
1.43737 = idf(docFreq=28552, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2209)
0.014236772 = weight(_text_:und in 2209) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.014236772 = score(doc=2209,freq=12.0), product of:
0.047469996 = queryWeight, product of:
2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
0.02141793 = queryNorm
0.29991096 = fieldWeight in 2209, product of:
3.4641016 = tf(freq=12.0), with freq of:
12.0 = termFreq=12.0
2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2209)
0.09677419 = coord(3/31)
- Abstract
- In der globalen Online-Umgebung stellen viele bibliographische Dienstleistungen integrierten Zugang zu unterschiedlichen internetbasierten OPACs zur Verfügung. In solch einer Umgebung erwarten Benutzer mehr Übereinstimmungen innerhalb und zwischen den Systemen zu sehen. Zweck dieser Studie ist, die Indexierungskonsistenz zwischen Systemen zu untersuchen. Währenddessen werden einige Faktoren, die die Indexierungskonsistenz beeinflussen können, untersucht. Wichtigstes Ziel dieser Studie ist, die Gründe für die Inkonsistenzen herauszufinden, damit sinnvolle Vorschläge gemacht werden können, um die Indexierungskonsistenz zu verbessern. Eine Auswahl von 3307 Monographien wurde aus zwei chinesischen bibliographischen Katalogen gewählt. Nach Hooper's Formel war die durchschnittliche Indexierungskonsistenz für Indexterme 64,2% und für Klassennummern 61,6%. Nach Rolling's Formel war sie für Indexterme 70,7% und für Klassennummern 63,4%. Mehrere Faktoren, die die Indexierungskonsistenz beeinflussen, wurden untersucht: (1) Indexierungsbereite; (2) Indexierungsspezifizität; (3) Länge der Monographien; (4) Kategorie der Indexierungssprache; (5) Sachgebiet der Monographien; (6) Entwicklung von Disziplinen; (7) Struktur des Thesaurus oder der Klassifikation; (8) Erscheinungsjahr. Gründe für die Inkonsistenzen wurden ebenfalls analysiert. Die Analyse ergab: (1) den Indexieren mangelt es an Fachwissen, Vertrautheit mit den Indexierungssprachen und den Indexierungsregeln, so dass viele Inkonsistenzen verursacht wurden; (2) der Mangel an vereinheitlichten oder präzisen Regeln brachte ebenfalls Inkonsistenzen hervor; (3) verzögerte Überarbeitungen der Indexierungssprachen, Mangel an terminologischer Kontrolle, zu wenige Erläuterungen und "siehe auch" Referenzen, sowie die hohe semantische Freiheit bei der Auswahl von Deskriptoren oder Klassen, verursachten Inkonsistenzen.
- Imprint
- Berlin : Humboldt-Universität / Institut für Bibliotheks- und Informationswissenschaft
- Language
- e
-
Hurwitz, F.I.: ¬A study of indexer consistency (1969)
0.00
0.0029379772 = product of:
0.04553865 = sum of:
0.035760656 = weight(_text_:20 in 2270) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.035760656 = score(doc=2270,freq=2.0), product of:
0.05887406 = queryWeight, product of:
2.748821 = idf(docFreq=7692, maxDocs=44218)
0.02141793 = queryNorm
0.60740936 = fieldWeight in 2270, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
2.748821 = idf(docFreq=7692, maxDocs=44218)
0.15625 = fieldNorm(doc=2270)
0.009777991 = weight(_text_:e in 2270) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.009777991 = score(doc=2270,freq=2.0), product of:
0.03078549 = queryWeight, product of:
1.43737 = idf(docFreq=28552, maxDocs=44218)
0.02141793 = queryNorm
0.31761688 = fieldWeight in 2270, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
1.43737 = idf(docFreq=28552, maxDocs=44218)
0.15625 = fieldNorm(doc=2270)
0.06451613 = coord(2/31)
- Language
- e
- Source
- American documentation. 20(1969), S.92-94
-
Cooper, W.S.: Is interindexer consistency a hobgoblin? (1969)
0.00
0.0029379772 = product of:
0.04553865 = sum of:
0.035760656 = weight(_text_:20 in 2273) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.035760656 = score(doc=2273,freq=2.0), product of:
0.05887406 = queryWeight, product of:
2.748821 = idf(docFreq=7692, maxDocs=44218)
0.02141793 = queryNorm
0.60740936 = fieldWeight in 2273, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
2.748821 = idf(docFreq=7692, maxDocs=44218)
0.15625 = fieldNorm(doc=2273)
0.009777991 = weight(_text_:e in 2273) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.009777991 = score(doc=2273,freq=2.0), product of:
0.03078549 = queryWeight, product of:
1.43737 = idf(docFreq=28552, maxDocs=44218)
0.02141793 = queryNorm
0.31761688 = fieldWeight in 2273, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
1.43737 = idf(docFreq=28552, maxDocs=44218)
0.15625 = fieldNorm(doc=2273)
0.06451613 = coord(2/31)
- Language
- e
- Source
- American documentation. 20(1969), S.268-278
-
Tinker, F.F.: Imprecision in meaning measured by inconsistency of indexing (1966-68)
0.00
0.0027229881 = product of:
0.028137546 = sum of:
0.011624276 = weight(_text_:und in 2275) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.011624276 = score(doc=2275,freq=2.0), product of:
0.047469996 = queryWeight, product of:
2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
0.02141793 = queryNorm
0.24487628 = fieldWeight in 2275, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=2275)
0.0048889956 = weight(_text_:e in 2275) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.0048889956 = score(doc=2275,freq=2.0), product of:
0.03078549 = queryWeight, product of:
1.43737 = idf(docFreq=28552, maxDocs=44218)
0.02141793 = queryNorm
0.15880844 = fieldWeight in 2275, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
1.43737 = idf(docFreq=28552, maxDocs=44218)
0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=2275)
0.011624276 = weight(_text_:und in 2275) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.011624276 = score(doc=2275,freq=2.0), product of:
0.047469996 = queryWeight, product of:
2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
0.02141793 = queryNorm
0.24487628 = fieldWeight in 2275, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=2275)
0.09677419 = coord(3/31)
- Content
- Ergebnisse: (1) Wenn SW frei gewählt, Recherche um so schwieriger, je mehr SW; (2) 'ältere' SW häufiger und weniger genau verwendet als 'jüngere'; (3) viele Wörter mit ungenauer Bedeutung
- Language
- e
-
Zunde, P.; Dexter, M.E.: Indexing consistency and quality (1969)
0.00
0.0023503818 = product of:
0.036430918 = sum of:
0.028608523 = weight(_text_:20 in 2264) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.028608523 = score(doc=2264,freq=2.0), product of:
0.05887406 = queryWeight, product of:
2.748821 = idf(docFreq=7692, maxDocs=44218)
0.02141793 = queryNorm
0.4859275 = fieldWeight in 2264, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
2.748821 = idf(docFreq=7692, maxDocs=44218)
0.125 = fieldNorm(doc=2264)
0.0078223925 = weight(_text_:e in 2264) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.0078223925 = score(doc=2264,freq=2.0), product of:
0.03078549 = queryWeight, product of:
1.43737 = idf(docFreq=28552, maxDocs=44218)
0.02141793 = queryNorm
0.2540935 = fieldWeight in 2264, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
1.43737 = idf(docFreq=28552, maxDocs=44218)
0.125 = fieldNorm(doc=2264)
0.06451613 = coord(2/31)
- Language
- e
- Source
- American documentation. 20(1969), S.259-267
-
Swanson, D.R.: ¬The evidence underlying the Cranfield results (1965)
0.00
0.0023503818 = product of:
0.036430918 = sum of:
0.028608523 = weight(_text_:20 in 2266) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.028608523 = score(doc=2266,freq=2.0), product of:
0.05887406 = queryWeight, product of:
2.748821 = idf(docFreq=7692, maxDocs=44218)
0.02141793 = queryNorm
0.4859275 = fieldWeight in 2266, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
2.748821 = idf(docFreq=7692, maxDocs=44218)
0.125 = fieldNorm(doc=2266)
0.0078223925 = weight(_text_:e in 2266) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.0078223925 = score(doc=2266,freq=2.0), product of:
0.03078549 = queryWeight, product of:
1.43737 = idf(docFreq=28552, maxDocs=44218)
0.02141793 = queryNorm
0.2540935 = fieldWeight in 2266, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
1.43737 = idf(docFreq=28552, maxDocs=44218)
0.125 = fieldNorm(doc=2266)
0.06451613 = coord(2/31)
- Language
- e
- Source
- Library quarterly. 35(1965), S.1-20
-
Azubuike, A.A.; Umoh, J.S.: Computerized information storage and retrieval systems (1988)
0.00
0.0023503818 = product of:
0.036430918 = sum of:
0.028608523 = weight(_text_:20 in 4153) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.028608523 = score(doc=4153,freq=2.0), product of:
0.05887406 = queryWeight, product of:
2.748821 = idf(docFreq=7692, maxDocs=44218)
0.02141793 = queryNorm
0.4859275 = fieldWeight in 4153, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
2.748821 = idf(docFreq=7692, maxDocs=44218)
0.125 = fieldNorm(doc=4153)
0.0078223925 = weight(_text_:e in 4153) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.0078223925 = score(doc=4153,freq=2.0), product of:
0.03078549 = queryWeight, product of:
1.43737 = idf(docFreq=28552, maxDocs=44218)
0.02141793 = queryNorm
0.2540935 = fieldWeight in 4153, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
1.43737 = idf(docFreq=28552, maxDocs=44218)
0.125 = fieldNorm(doc=4153)
0.06451613 = coord(2/31)
- Language
- e
- Source
- International library review. 20(1988), S.101-110
-
Gretz, M.; Thomas, M.: Indexierungen in biomedizinischen Literaturdatenbanken : eine vergleichende Analyse (1991)
0.00
0.0023477252 = product of:
0.036389742 = sum of:
0.018194871 = weight(_text_:und in 5104) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.018194871 = score(doc=5104,freq=10.0), product of:
0.047469996 = queryWeight, product of:
2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
0.02141793 = queryNorm
0.38329202 = fieldWeight in 5104, product of:
3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
10.0 = termFreq=10.0
2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=5104)
0.018194871 = weight(_text_:und in 5104) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.018194871 = score(doc=5104,freq=10.0), product of:
0.047469996 = queryWeight, product of:
2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
0.02141793 = queryNorm
0.38329202 = fieldWeight in 5104, product of:
3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
10.0 = termFreq=10.0
2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=5104)
0.06451613 = coord(2/31)
- Abstract
- Auf der Grundlage von vier Originaldokumenten, d.h. dokumentarischen Bezugseinheiten (DBEs), wird die Indexierung in vier biomedizinischen Online-Datenbanken (MEDLINE, EMBASE, BIOSIS PREVIEWS, SCISEARCH) analysiert. Anhand von Beispielen werden inahltliche Erschließung, Indexierungstiefe, Indexierungsbreite, Indexierungskonsistenz, Präzision (durch syntaktisches Indexieren, Gewichtung, Proximity Operatoren) und Wiederauffindbarkeit (Recall) der in den Datenbanken gespeicherten Dokumentationseinheien (DBEs) untersucht. Die zeitaufwendigere intellektuelle Indexierung bei MEDLINE und EMBASE erweist sich als wesentlich präziser als die schneller verfügbare maschinelle Zuteilung von Deskriptoren in BIOSIS PREVIEWS und SCISEARCH. In Teil 1 der Untersuchung werden die Indexierungen in MEDLINE und EMBASE, in Teil 2 die Deskriptorenzuteilungen in BIOSIS PREVIEWS und SCISEARCH verglichen
-
Chan, L.M.: Inter-indexer consistency in subject cataloging (1989)
0.00
0.0021783905 = product of:
0.022510037 = sum of:
0.009299421 = weight(_text_:und in 2276) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.009299421 = score(doc=2276,freq=2.0), product of:
0.047469996 = queryWeight, product of:
2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
0.02141793 = queryNorm
0.19590102 = fieldWeight in 2276, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=2276)
0.0039111963 = weight(_text_:e in 2276) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.0039111963 = score(doc=2276,freq=2.0), product of:
0.03078549 = queryWeight, product of:
1.43737 = idf(docFreq=28552, maxDocs=44218)
0.02141793 = queryNorm
0.12704675 = fieldWeight in 2276, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
1.43737 = idf(docFreq=28552, maxDocs=44218)
0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=2276)
0.009299421 = weight(_text_:und in 2276) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.009299421 = score(doc=2276,freq=2.0), product of:
0.047469996 = queryWeight, product of:
2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
0.02141793 = queryNorm
0.19590102 = fieldWeight in 2276, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=2276)
0.09677419 = coord(3/31)
- Content
- Die Studie enthält Konsistenzzahlen bezogen auf die LCSH. Diese Zahlen sind kategorienbezogen und können teilweise auf die RSWK übertragen werden
- Language
- e
-
Ansari, M.: Matching between assigned descriptors and title keywords in medical theses (2005)
0.00
0.001810171 = product of:
0.0187051 = sum of:
0.008940164 = weight(_text_:20 in 4739) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.008940164 = score(doc=4739,freq=2.0), product of:
0.05887406 = queryWeight, product of:
2.748821 = idf(docFreq=7692, maxDocs=44218)
0.02141793 = queryNorm
0.15185234 = fieldWeight in 4739, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
2.748821 = idf(docFreq=7692, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4739)
0.0024444978 = weight(_text_:e in 4739) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.0024444978 = score(doc=4739,freq=2.0), product of:
0.03078549 = queryWeight, product of:
1.43737 = idf(docFreq=28552, maxDocs=44218)
0.02141793 = queryNorm
0.07940422 = fieldWeight in 4739, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
1.43737 = idf(docFreq=28552, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4739)
0.007320437 = product of:
0.014640874 = sum of:
0.014640874 = weight(_text_:29 in 4739) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.014640874 = score(doc=4739,freq=2.0), product of:
0.07534158 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
0.02141793 = queryNorm
0.19432661 = fieldWeight in 4739, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4739)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.09677419 = coord(3/31)
- Date
- 11. 2.1997 20:00:30
3.12.2005 19:38:29
- Language
- e
-
Lee, D.H.; Schleyer, T.: Social tagging is no substitute for controlled indexing : a comparison of Medical Subject Headings and CiteULike tags assigned to 231,388 papers (2012)
0.00
0.001810171 = product of:
0.0187051 = sum of:
0.008940164 = weight(_text_:20 in 383) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.008940164 = score(doc=383,freq=2.0), product of:
0.05887406 = queryWeight, product of:
2.748821 = idf(docFreq=7692, maxDocs=44218)
0.02141793 = queryNorm
0.15185234 = fieldWeight in 383, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
2.748821 = idf(docFreq=7692, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=383)
0.0024444978 = weight(_text_:e in 383) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.0024444978 = score(doc=383,freq=2.0), product of:
0.03078549 = queryWeight, product of:
1.43737 = idf(docFreq=28552, maxDocs=44218)
0.02141793 = queryNorm
0.07940422 = fieldWeight in 383, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
1.43737 = idf(docFreq=28552, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=383)
0.007320437 = product of:
0.014640874 = sum of:
0.014640874 = weight(_text_:29 in 383) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.014640874 = score(doc=383,freq=2.0), product of:
0.07534158 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
0.02141793 = queryNorm
0.19432661 = fieldWeight in 383, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=383)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.09677419 = coord(3/31)
- Abstract
- Social tagging and controlled indexing both facilitate access to information resources. Given the increasing popularity of social tagging and the limitations of controlled indexing (primarily cost and scalability), it is reasonable to investigate to what degree social tagging could substitute for controlled indexing. In this study, we compared CiteULike tags to Medical Subject Headings (MeSH) terms for 231,388 citations indexed in MEDLINE. In addition to descriptive analyses of the data sets, we present a paper-by-paper analysis of tags and MeSH terms: the number of common annotations, Jaccard similarity, and coverage ratio. In the analysis, we apply three increasingly progressive levels of text processing, ranging from normalization to stemming, to reduce the impact of lexical differences. Annotations of our corpus consisted of over 76,968 distinct tags and 21,129 distinct MeSH terms. The top 20 tags/MeSH terms showed little direct overlap. On a paper-by-paper basis, the number of common annotations ranged from 0.29 to 0.5 and the Jaccard similarity from 2.12% to 3.3% using increased levels of text processing. At most, 77,834 citations (33.6%) shared at least one annotation. Our results show that CiteULike tags and MeSH terms are quite distinct lexically, reflecting different viewpoints/processes between social tagging and controlled indexing.
- Date
- 26. 8.2012 14:29:37
- Language
- e
-
White, H.; Willis, C.; Greenberg, J.: HIVEing : the effect of a semantic web technology on inter-indexer consistency (2014)
0.00
0.0018037981 = product of:
0.018639248 = sum of:
0.008940164 = weight(_text_:20 in 1781) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.008940164 = score(doc=1781,freq=2.0), product of:
0.05887406 = queryWeight, product of:
2.748821 = idf(docFreq=7692, maxDocs=44218)
0.02141793 = queryNorm
0.15185234 = fieldWeight in 1781, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
2.748821 = idf(docFreq=7692, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1781)
0.0024444978 = weight(_text_:e in 1781) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.0024444978 = score(doc=1781,freq=2.0), product of:
0.03078549 = queryWeight, product of:
1.43737 = idf(docFreq=28552, maxDocs=44218)
0.02141793 = queryNorm
0.07940422 = fieldWeight in 1781, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
1.43737 = idf(docFreq=28552, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1781)
0.007254585 = product of:
0.01450917 = sum of:
0.01450917 = weight(_text_:22 in 1781) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.01450917 = score(doc=1781,freq=2.0), product of:
0.07500195 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.02141793 = queryNorm
0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 1781, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1781)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.09677419 = coord(3/31)
- Abstract
- Purpose - The purpose of this paper is to examine the effect of the Helping Interdisciplinary Vocabulary Engineering (HIVE) system on the inter-indexer consistency of information professionals when assigning keywords to a scientific abstract. This study examined first, the inter-indexer consistency of potential HIVE users; second, the impact HIVE had on consistency; and third, challenges associated with using HIVE. Design/methodology/approach - A within-subjects quasi-experimental research design was used for this study. Data were collected using a task-scenario based questionnaire. Analysis was performed on consistency results using Hooper's and Rolling's inter-indexer consistency measures. A series of t-tests was used to judge the significance between consistency measure results. Findings - Results suggest that HIVE improves inter-indexing consistency. Working with HIVE increased consistency rates by 22 percent (Rolling's) and 25 percent (Hooper's) when selecting relevant terms from all vocabularies. A statistically significant difference exists between the assignment of free-text keywords and machine-aided keywords. Issues with homographs, disambiguation, vocabulary choice, and document structure were all identified as potential challenges. Research limitations/implications - Research limitations for this study can be found in the small number of vocabularies used for the study. Future research will include implementing HIVE into the Dryad Repository and studying its application in a repository system. Originality/value - This paper showcases several features used in HIVE system. By using traditional consistency measures to evaluate a semantic web technology, this paper emphasizes the link between traditional indexing and next generation machine-aided indexing (MAI) tools.
- Date
- 10. 3.1997 20:31:13
- Language
- e
-
Shoham, S.; Kedar, R.: ¬The subject cataloging of monographs with the use of keywords (2001)
0.00
0.0017348311 = product of:
0.017926589 = sum of:
0.010114641 = weight(_text_:20 in 5442) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.010114641 = score(doc=5442,freq=4.0), product of:
0.05887406 = queryWeight, product of:
2.748821 = idf(docFreq=7692, maxDocs=44218)
0.02141793 = queryNorm
0.17180131 = fieldWeight in 5442, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
2.748821 = idf(docFreq=7692, maxDocs=44218)
0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=5442)
0.0019555981 = weight(_text_:e in 5442) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.0019555981 = score(doc=5442,freq=2.0), product of:
0.03078549 = queryWeight, product of:
1.43737 = idf(docFreq=28552, maxDocs=44218)
0.02141793 = queryNorm
0.063523374 = fieldWeight in 5442, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
1.43737 = idf(docFreq=28552, maxDocs=44218)
0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=5442)
0.0058563496 = product of:
0.011712699 = sum of:
0.011712699 = weight(_text_:29 in 5442) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.011712699 = score(doc=5442,freq=2.0), product of:
0.07534158 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
0.02141793 = queryNorm
0.15546128 = fieldWeight in 5442, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=5442)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.09677419 = coord(3/31)
- Content
- The overall objective of this study was to examine the implementation of a different approach to the expression of the subject content of monographs in the cataloging record, i.e., the use of a post-coordinate, thesaurus of keywords, using inter-indexer consistency testing and in-depth analysis of mistakes in indexing. A sample of 50 non-fiction monographs was subject cataloged by 16 library science students (non-experienced indexers) using the new Hebrew Thesaurus of Indexing Terms (1996). The 800 indexing records of the non-experienced indexers were compared to the "correct indexing records" (prepared by a panel of three experienced indexers). Indexing consistency was measured using two different formulas used in previous inter-indexer studies. A medium level of inter-indexer consistency was found. In the analysis of mistakes, it was found that the most frequent mistake was the assignment of indexing terms to minor subject matter (i.e., subjects that were less than 20% of the content of the book). Among possible explanations offered for these finding are: sparseness of scope notes in the thesaurus, the priority given by Israeli public libraries to Hebrew language materials in the development of their non-fiction collection, and the size of the output of the Israeli publishing industry of non-fiction materials in Hebrew. The results of the consistency tests and the mistakes analysis were also examined in light of several factors: (1) the number of indexing terms assigned; (2) the length of the monographs (number of pages); and (3) subject area of each monograph. The same examinations were carried out for the subject cataloging records prepared by the Israeli Center for Libraries (ICL) for these monographs.
- Date
- 28. 7.2006 20:15:08
- Language
- e
- Source
- Cataloging and classification quarterly. 33(2001) no.2, S.29-54
-
Bellamy, L.M.; Bickham, L.: Thesaurus development for subject cataloging (1989)
0.00
0.001633793 = product of:
0.016882528 = sum of:
0.0069745653 = weight(_text_:und in 2262) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.0069745653 = score(doc=2262,freq=2.0), product of:
0.047469996 = queryWeight, product of:
2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
0.02141793 = queryNorm
0.14692576 = fieldWeight in 2262, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2262)
0.0029333972 = weight(_text_:e in 2262) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.0029333972 = score(doc=2262,freq=2.0), product of:
0.03078549 = queryWeight, product of:
1.43737 = idf(docFreq=28552, maxDocs=44218)
0.02141793 = queryNorm
0.09528506 = fieldWeight in 2262, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
1.43737 = idf(docFreq=28552, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2262)
0.0069745653 = weight(_text_:und in 2262) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.0069745653 = score(doc=2262,freq=2.0), product of:
0.047469996 = queryWeight, product of:
2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
0.02141793 = queryNorm
0.14692576 = fieldWeight in 2262, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2262)
0.09677419 = coord(3/31)
- Language
- e
- Theme
- Konzeption und Anwendung des Prinzips Thesaurus
-
Harter, S.P.; Cheng, Y.-R.: Colinked descriptors : improving vocabulary selection for end-user searching (1996)
0.00
0.001633793 = product of:
0.016882528 = sum of:
0.0069745653 = weight(_text_:und in 4216) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.0069745653 = score(doc=4216,freq=2.0), product of:
0.047469996 = queryWeight, product of:
2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
0.02141793 = queryNorm
0.14692576 = fieldWeight in 4216, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4216)
0.0029333972 = weight(_text_:e in 4216) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.0029333972 = score(doc=4216,freq=2.0), product of:
0.03078549 = queryWeight, product of:
1.43737 = idf(docFreq=28552, maxDocs=44218)
0.02141793 = queryNorm
0.09528506 = fieldWeight in 4216, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
1.43737 = idf(docFreq=28552, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4216)
0.0069745653 = weight(_text_:und in 4216) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.0069745653 = score(doc=4216,freq=2.0), product of:
0.047469996 = queryWeight, product of:
2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
0.02141793 = queryNorm
0.14692576 = fieldWeight in 4216, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4216)
0.09677419 = coord(3/31)
- Language
- e
- Theme
- Konzeption und Anwendung des Prinzips Thesaurus
-
Kedar, R.; Shoham, S.: ¬The subject cataloging of monographs with the use of a thesaurus (2003)
0.00
0.001633793 = product of:
0.016882528 = sum of:
0.0069745653 = weight(_text_:und in 2700) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.0069745653 = score(doc=2700,freq=2.0), product of:
0.047469996 = queryWeight, product of:
2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
0.02141793 = queryNorm
0.14692576 = fieldWeight in 2700, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2700)
0.0029333972 = weight(_text_:e in 2700) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.0029333972 = score(doc=2700,freq=2.0), product of:
0.03078549 = queryWeight, product of:
1.43737 = idf(docFreq=28552, maxDocs=44218)
0.02141793 = queryNorm
0.09528506 = fieldWeight in 2700, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
1.43737 = idf(docFreq=28552, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2700)
0.0069745653 = weight(_text_:und in 2700) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.0069745653 = score(doc=2700,freq=2.0), product of:
0.047469996 = queryWeight, product of:
2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
0.02141793 = queryNorm
0.14692576 = fieldWeight in 2700, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2700)
0.09677419 = coord(3/31)
- Language
- e
- Theme
- Konzeption und Anwendung des Prinzips Thesaurus
-
Bade, D.: ¬The creation and persistence of misinformation in shared library catalogs : language and subject knowledge in a technological era (2002)
0.00
0.0015309842 = product of:
0.011865128 = sum of:
0.0050573205 = weight(_text_:20 in 1858) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.0050573205 = score(doc=1858,freq=4.0), product of:
0.05887406 = queryWeight, product of:
2.748821 = idf(docFreq=7692, maxDocs=44218)
0.02141793 = queryNorm
0.08590066 = fieldWeight in 1858, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
2.748821 = idf(docFreq=7692, maxDocs=44218)
0.015625 = fieldNorm(doc=1858)
9.777991E-4 = weight(_text_:e in 1858) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
9.777991E-4 = score(doc=1858,freq=2.0), product of:
0.03078549 = queryWeight, product of:
1.43737 = idf(docFreq=28552, maxDocs=44218)
0.02141793 = queryNorm
0.031761687 = fieldWeight in 1858, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
1.43737 = idf(docFreq=28552, maxDocs=44218)
0.015625 = fieldNorm(doc=1858)
0.0029281748 = product of:
0.0058563496 = sum of:
0.0058563496 = weight(_text_:29 in 1858) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.0058563496 = score(doc=1858,freq=2.0), product of:
0.07534158 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
0.02141793 = queryNorm
0.07773064 = fieldWeight in 1858, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
0.015625 = fieldNorm(doc=1858)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.002901834 = product of:
0.005803668 = sum of:
0.005803668 = weight(_text_:22 in 1858) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.005803668 = score(doc=1858,freq=2.0), product of:
0.07500195 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.02141793 = queryNorm
0.07738023 = fieldWeight in 1858, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.015625 = fieldNorm(doc=1858)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.12903225 = coord(4/31)
- Date
- 22. 9.1997 19:16:05
4.10.2003 19:20:59
- Footnote
- Bade begins his discussion of errors in subject analysis by summarizing the contents of seven records containing what he considers to be egregious errors. The examples were drawn only from items that he has encountered in the course of his work. Five of the seven records were full-level ("I" level) records for Eastern European materials created between 1996 and 2000 in the OCLC WorldCat database. The final two examples were taken from records created by Bade himself over an unspecified period of time. Although he is to be commended for examining the actual items cataloged and for examining mostly items that he claims to have adequate linguistic and subject expertise to evaluate reliably, Bade's methodology has major flaws. First and foremost, the number of examples provided is completely inadequate to draw any conclusions about the extent of the problem. Although an in-depth qualitative analysis of a small number of records might have yielded some valuable insight into factors that contribute to errors in subject analysis, Bade provides no Information about the circumstances under which the live OCLC records he critiques were created. Instead, he offers simplistic explanations for the errors based solely an his own assumptions. He supplements his analysis of examples with an extremely brief survey of other studies regarding errors in subject analysis, which consists primarily of criticism of work done by Sheila Intner. In the end, it is impossible to draw any reliable conclusions about the nature or extent of errors in subject analysis found in records in shared bibliographic databases based an Bade's analysis. In the final third of the essay, Bade finally reveals his true concern: the deintellectualization of cataloging. It would strengthen the essay tremendously to present this as the primary premise from the very beginning, as this section offers glimpses of a compelling argument. Bade laments, "Many librarians simply do not sec cataloging as an intellectual activity requiring an educated mind" (p. 20). Commenting an recent trends in copy cataloging practice, he declares, "The disaster of our time is that this work is being done more and more by people who can neither evaluate nor correct imported errors and offen are forbidden from even thinking about it" (p. 26). Bade argues that the most valuable content found in catalog records is the intellectual content contributed by knowledgeable catalogers, and he asserts that to perform intellectually demanding tasks such as subject analysis reliably and effectively, catalogers must have the linguistic and subject knowledge required to gain at least a rudimentary understanding of the materials that they describe. He contends that requiring catalogers to quickly dispense with materials in unfamiliar languages and subjects clearly undermines their ability to perform the intellectual work of cataloging and leads to an increasing number of errors in the bibliographic records contributed to shared databases.
Arguing that catalogers need to work both quickly and accurately, Bade maintains that employing specialists is the most efficient and effective way to achieve this outcome. Far less compelling than these arguments are Bade's concluding remarks, in which he offers meager suggestions for correcting the problems as he sees them. Overall, this essay is little more than a curmudgeon's diatribe. Addressed primarily to catalogers and library administrators, the analysis presented is too superficial to assist practicing catalogers or cataloging managers in developing solutions to any systemic problems in current cataloging practice, and it presents too little evidence of pervasive problems to convince budget-conscious library administrators of a need to alter practice or to increase their investment in local cataloging operations. Indeed, the reliance upon anecdotal evidence and the apparent nit-picking that dominate the essay might tend to reinforce a negative image of catalogers in the minds of some. To his credit, Bade does provide an important reminder that it is the intellectual contributions made by thousands of erudite catalogers that have made shared cataloging a successful strategy for improving cataloging efficiency. This is an important point that often seems to be forgotten in academic libraries when focus centers an cutting costs. Had Bade focused more narrowly upon the issue of deintellectualization of cataloging and written a carefully structured essay to advance this argument, this essay might have been much more effective." - KO 29(2002) nos.3/4, S.236-237 (A. Sauperl)
- Language
- e
-
Cleverdon, C.W.: ASLIB Cranfield Research Project : Report on the first stage of an investigation into the comparative efficiency of indexing systems (1960)
0.00
0.0015017934 = product of:
0.023277799 = sum of:
0.0058667944 = weight(_text_:e in 6158) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.0058667944 = score(doc=6158,freq=2.0), product of:
0.03078549 = queryWeight, product of:
1.43737 = idf(docFreq=28552, maxDocs=44218)
0.02141793 = queryNorm
0.19057012 = fieldWeight in 6158, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
1.43737 = idf(docFreq=28552, maxDocs=44218)
0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=6158)
0.017411005 = product of:
0.03482201 = sum of:
0.03482201 = weight(_text_:22 in 6158) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.03482201 = score(doc=6158,freq=2.0), product of:
0.07500195 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.02141793 = queryNorm
0.46428138 = fieldWeight in 6158, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=6158)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.06451613 = coord(2/31)
- Footnote
- Rez. in: College and research libraries 22(1961) no.3, S.228 (G. Jahoda)
- Language
- e
