Search (68 results, page 1 of 4)

0.0028211798 = product of:
  0.0705295 = sum of:
    0.0705295 = weight(_text_:einzelne in 3001) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0705295 = score(doc=3001,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.1095598 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.885746 = idf(docFreq=333, maxDocs=44218)
          0.018614428 = queryNorm
        0.64375347 = fieldWeight in 3001, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          5.885746 = idf(docFreq=333, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=3001)
  0.04 = coord(1/25)

BK

18.00 Einzelne Sprachen und Literaturen allgemein

Classification

18.00 Einzelne Sprachen und Literaturen allgemein

0.001424911 = product of:
  0.035622776 = sum of:
    0.035622776 = weight(_text_:einzelne in 2432) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.035622776 = score(doc=2432,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.1095598 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.885746 = idf(docFreq=333, maxDocs=44218)
          0.018614428 = queryNorm
        0.3251446 = fieldWeight in 2432, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          5.885746 = idf(docFreq=333, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2432)
  0.04 = coord(1/25)

Abstract

Ausgangslage Die Katalog-Recherchen über Internet, also von außerhalb der Bibliothek, nehmen erwartungsgemäß stark zu bzw. sind mittlerweile die Regel. Damit ist natürlich das Bedürfnis und die Notwendigkeit gewachsen, über den Titel hinaus zusätzliche inhaltliche Informationen zu erhalten, die es erlauben, die Zweckmäßigkeit wesentlich besser abschätzen zu können, eine Bestellung vorzunehmen oder vielleicht auch 50 km in die Bibliothek zu fahren, um ein Buch zu entleihen. Dieses Informationsdefizit wird zunehmend als gravierender Mangel erfahren. Inhaltsverzeichnisse referieren den Inhalt kurz und prägnant. Sie sind die erste Stelle, welche zur Relevanz-Beurteilung herangezogen wird. Fast alle relevanten Terme einer Fachbuchpublikation finden sich bereits dort. Andererseits wird immer deutlicher, dass die dem bibliothekarischen Paradigma entsprechende intellektuelle Indexierung der einzelnen dokumentarischen Einheiten mit den engsten umfassenden dokumentationssprachlichen Termen (Schlagwörter, Klassen) zwar eine notwendige, aber keinesfalls hinreichende Methode darstellt, das teuer erworbene Bibliotheksgut Information für den Benutzer in seiner spezifischen Problemstellung zu aktivieren und als Informationsdienstleistung anbieten zu können. Informationen zu sehr speziellen Fragestellungen, die oft nur in kürzeren Abschnitten (Kapitel) erörtert werden, sind derzeit nur indirekt, mit großem Zeitaufwand und oft überhaupt nicht auffindbar. Sie liegen sozusagen brach. Die Tiefe der intellektuellen Indexierung bis in einzelne inhaltliche Details zu erweitern, ist aus personellen und damit auch finanziellen Gesichtspunkten nicht vertretbar. Bibliotheken fallen deshalb in der Wahrnehmung von Informationssuchenden immer mehr zurück. Die enorme Informationsvielfalt liegt hinter dem Informations- bzw. Recherchehorizont der bibliographischen Aufnahmen im Katalog.

0.001424911 = product of:
  0.035622776 = sum of:
    0.035622776 = weight(_text_:einzelne in 4063) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.035622776 = score(doc=4063,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.1095598 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.885746 = idf(docFreq=333, maxDocs=44218)
          0.018614428 = queryNorm
        0.3251446 = fieldWeight in 4063, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          5.885746 = idf(docFreq=333, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4063)
  0.04 = coord(1/25)

Abstract

In der heutigen Zeit nimmt die Flut an Informationen exponentiell zu. In dieser »Informationsexplosion« entsteht täglich eine unüberschaubare Menge an neuen Informationen im Web: Beispielsweise 430 deutschsprachige Artikel bei Wikipedia, 2,4 Mio. Tweets bei Twitter und 12,2 Mio. Kommentare bei Facebook. Während in Deutschland vor einigen Jahren noch Google als nahezu einzige Suchmaschine beim Zugriff auf Informationen im Web genutzt wurde, nehmen heute die u.a. in Social Media veröffentlichten Meinungen und damit die Vorauswahl sowie Bewertung von Informationen einzelner Experten und Meinungsführer an Bedeutung zu. Aber wie können themenspezifische Informationen nun effizient für konkrete Fragestellungen identifiziert und bedarfsgerecht aufbereitet und visualisiert werden? Diese Studie gibt einen Überblick über semantische Standards und Formate, die Prozesse der semantischen Suche, Methoden und Techniken semantischer Suchsysteme, Komponenten zur Entwicklung semantischer Suchmaschinen sowie den Aufbau bestehender Anwendungen. Die Studie erläutert den prinzipiellen Aufbau semantischer Suchsysteme und stellt Methoden der semantischen Suche vor. Zudem werden Softwarewerkzeuge vorgestellt, mithilfe derer einzelne Funktionalitäten von semantischen Suchmaschinen realisiert werden können. Abschließend erfolgt die Betrachtung bestehender semantischer Suchmaschinen zur Veranschaulichung der Unterschiede der Systeme im Aufbau sowie in der Funktionalität.

0.0013875201 = product of:
  0.034688003 = sum of:
    0.034688003 = weight(_text_:post in 4417) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.034688003 = score(doc=4417,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.10811277 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.808009 = idf(docFreq=360, maxDocs=44218)
          0.018614428 = queryNorm
        0.3208502 = fieldWeight in 4417, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          5.808009 = idf(docFreq=360, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4417)
  0.04 = coord(1/25)

Abstract

This study explores how experts and novices in pedagogics expanded queries supported by the ERIC thesaurus, and how this was connected to the search effectiveness in an easy and a difficult search task. The expert group consisted of 15 undergraduates in pedagogy and the novice group of 15 students with no previous studies in this field. Their search logs were recorded and a pre- and post-search interview was conducted. The results show that the number and type of terms selected from the thesaurus for expansion by experts improved search effectiveness, whereas there were no connections between the use of thesaurus and improvement of effectiveness among novices. The effectiveness of expansions varied between the facets of the queries. Thus, a vital condition for benefiting from a thesaurus in query expansion to improve search results is sufficient familiarity with the search topic. The results suggest also that it is not in the first place the number of terms used in expansion, but their type and quality that are crucial for search success.

0.0013875201 = product of:
  0.034688003 = sum of:
    0.034688003 = weight(_text_:post in 206) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.034688003 = score(doc=206,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.10811277 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.808009 = idf(docFreq=360, maxDocs=44218)
          0.018614428 = queryNorm
        0.3208502 = fieldWeight in 206, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          5.808009 = idf(docFreq=360, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=206)
  0.04 = coord(1/25)

Abstract

Context is one of the most important concepts in information seeking and retrieval research. However, the challenges of studying context are great; thus, it is more common for researchers to use context as a post hoc explanatory factor, rather than as a concept that drives inquiry. The purposes of this study were to develop a method for collecting data about information seeking context in natural online environments, and identify which aspects of context should be considered when studying online information seeking. The study is reported in two parts. In this, the first part, the background and method are presented. Results and implications of this research are presented in Part 2 (Kelly, in press). Part 1 discusses previous literature on information seeking context and behavior and situates the current work within this literature. This part further describes the naturalistic, longitudinal research design that was used to examine and measure the online information seeking contexts of users during a 14-week period. In this design, information seeking context was characterized by a user's self-identified tasks and topics, and several attributes of these, such as the length of time the user expected to work on a task and the user's familiarity with a topic. At weekly intervals, users evaluated the usefulness of the documents that they viewed, and classified these documents according to their tasks and topics. At the end of the study, users provided feedback about the study method.

0.0013875201 = product of:
  0.034688003 = sum of:
    0.034688003 = weight(_text_:post in 215) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.034688003 = score(doc=215,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.10811277 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.808009 = idf(docFreq=360, maxDocs=44218)
          0.018614428 = queryNorm
        0.3208502 = fieldWeight in 215, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          5.808009 = idf(docFreq=360, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=215)
  0.04 = coord(1/25)

Abstract

Context is one of the most important concepts in information seeking and retrieval research. However, the challenges of studying context are great; thus, it is more common for researchers to use context as a post hoc explanatory factor, rather than as a concept that drives inquiry. The purpose of this study was to develop a method for collecting data about information seeking context in natural online environments, and identify which aspects of context should be considered when studying online information seeking. The study is reported in two parts. In this, the second part, results and implications of this research are presented. Part 1 (Kelly, 2006) discussed previous literature on information seeking context and behavior, situated the current study within this literature, and described the naturalistic, longitudinal research design that was used to examine and measure the online information seeking context of seven users during a 14-week period. Results provide support for the value of the method in studying online information seeking context, the relative importance of various measures of context, how these measures change over time, and, finally, the relationship between these measures. In particular, results demonstrate significant differences in distributions of usefulness ratings according to task and topic.

0.0013875201 = product of:
  0.034688003 = sum of:
    0.034688003 = weight(_text_:post in 2257) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.034688003 = score(doc=2257,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.10811277 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.808009 = idf(docFreq=360, maxDocs=44218)
          0.018614428 = queryNorm
        0.3208502 = fieldWeight in 2257, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          5.808009 = idf(docFreq=360, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2257)
  0.04 = coord(1/25)

Abstract

The Future of Information Architecture examines issues surrounding why information is processed, stored and applied in the way that it has, since time immemorial. Contrary to the conventional wisdom held by many scholars in human history, the recurrent debate on the explanation of the most basic categories of information (eg space, time causation, quality, quantity) has been misconstrued, to the effect that there exists some deeper categories and principles behind these categories of information - with enormous implications for our understanding of reality in general. To understand this, the book is organised in to four main parts: Part I begins with the vital question concerning the role of information within the context of the larger theoretical debate in the literature. Part II provides a critical examination of the nature of data taxonomy from the main perspectives of culture, society, nature and the mind. Part III constructively invesitgates the world of information network from the main perspectives of culture, society, nature and the mind. Part IV proposes six main theses in the authors synthetic theory of information architecture, namely, (a) the first thesis on the simpleness-complicatedness principle, (b) the second thesis on the exactness-vagueness principle (c) the third thesis on the slowness-quickness principle (d) the fourth thesis on the order-chaos principle, (e) the fifth thesis on the symmetry-asymmetry principle, and (f) the sixth thesis on the post-human stage.

0.0013250748 = product of:
  0.033126872 = sum of:
    0.033126872 = weight(_text_:700 in 1270) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.033126872 = score(doc=1270,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.1363961 = queryWeight, product of:
          7.3274393 = idf(docFreq=78, maxDocs=44218)
          0.018614428 = queryNorm
        0.2428726 = fieldWeight in 1270, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          7.3274393 = idf(docFreq=78, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0234375 = fieldNorm(doc=1270)
  0.04 = coord(1/25)

Footnote

Rez. in: JASIST 54(2003) no.7, S.695-697 (R. Savolainen): "Donald O. Case has written an ambitious book to create an overall picture of the major approaches to information needs and seeking (INS) studies. The aim to write an extensive review is reflected in the list of references containing about 700 items. The high ambitions are explained an p. 14, where Case states that he is aiming at a multidisciplinary understanding of the concept of information seeking. In the Preface, the author characterizes his book as an introduction to the topic for students at the graduate level, as well as as a review and handbook for scholars engagged in information behavior research. In my view, Looking for Information is particularly welcome as an academic textbook because the field of INS studies suffers from the lack of monographs. Along with the continuous growth of the number of journal articles and conference papers, there is a genuine need for a book that picks up the numerous pieces and puts them together. The use of the study as a textbook is facilitated by clearly delineated sections an major themes and the wealth of concrete examples of information seeking in everyday contexts. The book is lucidly written and it is accessible to novice readers, too. At first glance, the idea of providing a comprehensive review of INS studies may seem a mission impossible because the current number of articles, papers, and other contributions in this field is nearing the 10,000 range (p. 224). Donald Case is not alone in the task of coming to grips with an increasing number of studies; similar problems have been faced by those writing INS-related chapters for the Annual Review of Information Science and Technology (ARIST). Case has solved the problem of "too many publications to be reviewed" by concentrating an the INS literature published during the last two decades. Secondly, studies an library use and information retrieval are discussed only to a limited extent. In addition, Case is highly selective as to studies focusing an the use of specific sources and channels such as WWW. These delineations are reasonable, even though they beg some questions. First, how should one draw the line between studies an information seeking and information retrieval? Case does not discuss this question in greater detail, although in recent years, the overlapping areas of information seeking and retrieval studies have been broadened, along with the growing importance of WWW in information seeking/retrieval. Secondly, how can one define the concept of information searching (or, more specifically, Internet or Web searching) in relation to information seeking and information retrieval? In the field of Web searching studies, there is an increasing number of contributions that are of direct relevance to information-seeking studies. Clearly, the advent of the Internet, particularly, the Web, has blurred the previous lines between INS and IR literature, making them less clear cut. The book consists of five main sections, and comprises 13 chapters. There is an Appendix serving the needs of an INS textbook (questions for discussion and application). The structure of the book is meticulously planned and, as a whole, it offers a sufficiently balanced contribution to theoretical, methodological, and empirical issues of INS. The title, Looking for Information: A Survey of Research an Information Seeking, Needs, and Behavior aptly describes the main substance of the book. . . . It is easy to agree with Case about the significance of the problem of specialization and fragmentation. This problem seems to be concomitant with the broadening field of INS research. In itself, Case's book can be interpreted as a struggle against this fragmentation. His book suggests that this struggle is not hopeless and that it is still possible to draw an overall picture of the evolving research field. The major pieces of the puzzle were found and the book will provide a useful overview of INS studies for many years."

9.46772E-4 = product of:
  0.0236693 = sum of:
    0.0236693 = product of:
      0.0473386 = sum of:
        0.0473386 = weight(_text_:allgemeines in 3803) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.0473386 = score(doc=3803,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.10620318 = queryWeight, product of:
              5.705423 = idf(docFreq=399, maxDocs=44218)
              0.018614428 = queryNorm
            0.44573617 = fieldWeight in 3803, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              5.705423 = idf(docFreq=399, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3803)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.04 = coord(1/25)

BK

06.30 (Bibliothekswesen / Dokumentationswesen: Allgemeines)

Classification

06.30 (Bibliothekswesen / Dokumentationswesen: Allgemeines)

7.133288E-4 = product of:
  0.01783322 = sum of:
    0.01783322 = product of:
      0.03566644 = sum of:
        0.03566644 = weight(_text_:22 in 1352) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.03566644 = score(doc=1352,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.065184556 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.018614428 = queryNorm
            0.54716086 = fieldWeight in 1352, 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=1352)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.04 = coord(1/25)

Date

22. 2.2003 17:25:39
22. 2.2003 18:17:40

7.0615945E-4 = product of:
  0.017653987 = sum of:
    0.017653987 = product of:
      0.035307974 = sum of:
        0.035307974 = weight(_text_:22 in 2134) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.035307974 = score(doc=2134,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.065184556 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.018614428 = queryNorm
            0.5416616 = fieldWeight in 2134, 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=2134)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.04 = coord(1/25)

Date

30. 3.2001 13:32:22

6.1077386E-4 = product of:
  0.015269347 = sum of:
    0.015269347 = product of:
      0.030538693 = sum of:
        0.030538693 = weight(_text_:29 in 6171) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.030538693 = score(doc=6171,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.06547974 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
              0.018614428 = queryNorm
            0.46638384 = fieldWeight in 6171, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
              0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=6171)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.04 = coord(1/25)

Date

25. 2.1997 10:29:16

6.1077386E-4 = product of:
  0.015269347 = sum of:
    0.015269347 = product of:
      0.030538693 = sum of:
        0.030538693 = weight(_text_:29 in 3807) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.030538693 = score(doc=3807,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.06547974 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
              0.018614428 = queryNorm
            0.46638384 = fieldWeight in 3807, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
              0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=3807)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.04 = coord(1/25)

Date

18. 5.2002 17:29:00

6.1077386E-4 = product of:
  0.015269347 = sum of:
    0.015269347 = product of:
      0.030538693 = sum of:
        0.030538693 = weight(_text_:29 in 4695) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.030538693 = score(doc=4695,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.06547974 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
              0.018614428 = queryNorm
            0.46638384 = fieldWeight in 4695, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
              0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=4695)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.04 = coord(1/25)

Source

Journal of information science. 29(2003) no.6, S.517-

5.942661E-4 = product of:
  0.014856652 = sum of:
    0.014856652 = product of:
      0.029713305 = sum of:
        0.029713305 = weight(_text_:dienstleistungen in 5946) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.029713305 = score(doc=5946,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.11187108 = queryWeight, product of:
              6.009912 = idf(docFreq=294, maxDocs=44218)
              0.018614428 = queryNorm
            0.2656031 = fieldWeight in 5946, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              6.009912 = idf(docFreq=294, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=5946)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.04 = coord(1/25)

Content

"Die kontinuierliche Optimierung der Informationsversorgung ist ein von allen Seiten unterstütztes Ziel in Forschung und Lehre. Neben der Verfügbarkeit an Literatur ist das Organisieren derselben, aber auch das Suchen, Finden und Erhalten von Informationen angesprochen. Die Anstrengungen der vergangenen Jahre für eine verbesserte Literaturrecherche haben in der Bibliothekswelt bereits zu einigen Erfolgen geführt. Inzwischen ist es selbstverständlich geworden, über das Internet in deutschen und internationalen Online-Katalogen nach relevanter Literatur zu suchen. Weiterführende Dienste wie Dokumentenlieferung oder direkte Verlinkung zu elektronischen Volltexten sind dabei nahtlos eingebunden. Die Weiterentwicklung bibliothekarischer Dienstleistungen werden ohne Unterbrechung vorangetrieben, zumal freie Suchmaschinen wie Google im "Information Retrieval", insbesondere durch Google-Scholar und Google-Buchsuche, einen beträchtlichen Konkurrenzdruck auf die Bibliotheken ausüben. Dabei drängt sich insgesamt der Eindruck auf, dass die Bibliotheken gegenüber den freien Suchmaschinen deren Entwicklungen hinterherlaufen. Ohne es als solches wahrzunehmen, verfügen die Bibliotheken im deutschsprachigen Raum jedoch über ein Instrument, mit dem sie im Wettbewerb mit Google um die Nutzerinnen wieder ihre Vorzüge herausstellen können. Es existiert längst ein Konzept, mit dessen Hilfe die Literaturrecherche inhaltlich-intuitiv gestaltet und damit ein Vorteil der Bibliotheksrecherche gegenüber kommerziellen Suchmaschinen herausgearbeitet werden kann. Das Konzept heißt "Regeln für den Schlagwortkatalog" (RSWK)' und bietet im Zusammenhang mit dem mittlerweile nicht mehr ganz so neuen Navigationskonzept "Faceted Browsing" ungeahnte Möglichkeiten eines intuitiven Recherschewerkzeuges, das Literatur gezielt inhaltlich entdecken lässt.

5.0897826E-4 = product of:
  0.012724456 = sum of:
    0.012724456 = product of:
      0.025448913 = sum of:
        0.025448913 = weight(_text_:29 in 2907) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.025448913 = score(doc=2907,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.06547974 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
              0.018614428 = queryNorm
            0.38865322 = fieldWeight in 2907, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
              0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=2907)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.04 = coord(1/25)

Date

5. 4.1996 15:29:15

5.043996E-4 = product of:
  0.01260999 = sum of:
    0.01260999 = product of:
      0.02521998 = sum of:
        0.02521998 = weight(_text_:22 in 2751) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.02521998 = score(doc=2751,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.065184556 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.018614428 = queryNorm
            0.38690117 = fieldWeight in 2751, 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=2751)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.04 = coord(1/25)

Date

1. 2.2016 18:25:22

5.043996E-4 = product of:
  0.01260999 = sum of:
    0.01260999 = product of:
      0.02521998 = sum of:
        0.02521998 = weight(_text_:22 in 2754) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.02521998 = score(doc=2754,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.065184556 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.018614428 = queryNorm
            0.38690117 = fieldWeight in 2754, 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=2754)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.04 = coord(1/25)

Date

1. 2.2016 18:25:22

5.043996E-4 = product of:
  0.01260999 = sum of:
    0.01260999 = product of:
      0.02521998 = sum of:
        0.02521998 = weight(_text_:22 in 3279) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.02521998 = score(doc=3279,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.065184556 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.018614428 = queryNorm
            0.38690117 = fieldWeight in 3279, 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=3279)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.04 = coord(1/25)

Source

Metadata and semantics research: 10th International Conference, MTSR 2016, Göttingen, Germany, November 22-25, 2016, Proceedings. Eds.: E. Garoufallou

5.043996E-4 = product of:
  0.01260999 = sum of:
    0.01260999 = product of:
      0.02521998 = sum of:
        0.02521998 = weight(_text_:22 in 3280) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.02521998 = score(doc=3280,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.065184556 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.018614428 = queryNorm
            0.38690117 = fieldWeight in 3280, 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=3280)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.04 = coord(1/25)

Source

Metadata and semantics research: 10th International Conference, MTSR 2016, Göttingen, Germany, November 22-25, 2016, Proceedings. Eds.: E. Garoufallou