-
Ladewig, C.; Rieger, M.: Ähnlichkeitsmessung mit und ohne aspektische Indexierung (1998)
0.01
0.0099168895 = product of:
0.05454289 = sum of:
0.019966504 = weight(_text_:und in 2526) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.019966504 = score(doc=2526,freq=10.0), product of:
0.04558063 = queryWeight, product of:
2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
0.02056547 = 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)
0.019966504 = weight(_text_:und in 2526) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.019966504 = score(doc=2526,freq=10.0), product of:
0.04558063 = queryWeight, product of:
2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
0.02056547 = 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)
0.011246519 = product of:
0.022493038 = sum of:
0.022493038 = weight(_text_:29 in 2526) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.022493038 = score(doc=2526,freq=2.0), product of:
0.072342895 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
0.02056547 = 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)
0.003363365 = weight(_text_:in in 2526) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.003363365 = score(doc=2526,freq=2.0), product of:
0.027974274 = queryWeight, product of:
1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
0.02056547 = queryNorm
0.120230645 = fieldWeight in 2526, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=2526)
0.18181819 = coord(4/22)
- 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
-
Taniguchi, S.: Recording evidence in bibliographic records and descriptive metadata (2005)
0.01
0.009718454 = product of:
0.07126866 = sum of:
0.038912293 = weight(_text_:notes in 3565) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.038912293 = score(doc=3565,freq=2.0), product of:
0.10987139 = queryWeight, product of:
5.3425174 = idf(docFreq=574, maxDocs=44218)
0.02056547 = queryNorm
0.35416222 = fieldWeight in 3565, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
5.3425174 = idf(docFreq=574, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=3565)
0.0061788964 = weight(_text_:in in 3565) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.0061788964 = score(doc=3565,freq=12.0), product of:
0.027974274 = queryWeight, product of:
1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
0.02056547 = queryNorm
0.22087781 = fieldWeight in 3565, product of:
3.4641016 = tf(freq=12.0), with freq of:
12.0 = termFreq=12.0
1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=3565)
0.026177472 = sum of:
0.009459447 = weight(_text_:science in 3565) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.009459447 = score(doc=3565,freq=2.0), product of:
0.0541719 = queryWeight, product of:
2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
0.02056547 = queryNorm
0.17461908 = fieldWeight in 3565, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=3565)
0.016718024 = weight(_text_:22 in 3565) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.016718024 = score(doc=3565,freq=2.0), product of:
0.072016776 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.02056547 = queryNorm
0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 3565, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=3565)
0.13636364 = coord(3/22)
- Abstract
- In this article recording evidence for data values in addition to the values themselves in bibliographic records and descriptive metadata is proposed, with the aim of improving the expressiveness and reliability of those records and metadata. Recorded evidence indicates why and how data values are recorded for elements. Recording the history of changes in data values is also proposed, with the aim of reinforcing recorded evidence. First, evidence that can be recorded is categorized into classes: identifiers of rules or tasks, action descriptions of them, and input and output data of them. Dates of recording values and evidence are an additional class. Then, the relative usefulness of evidence classes and also levels (i.e., the record, data element, or data value level) to which an individual evidence class is applied, is examined. Second, examples that can be viewed as recorded evidence in existing bibliographic records and current cataloging rules are shown. Third, some examples of bibliographic records and descriptive metadata with notes of evidence are demonstrated. Fourth, ways of using recorded evidence are addressed.
- Date
- 18. 6.2005 13:16:22
- Source
- Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 56(2005) no.8, S.872-882
-
Shoham, S.; Kedar, R.: ¬The subject cataloging of monographs with the use of keywords (2001)
0.01
0.0072296336 = product of:
0.039762985 = sum of:
0.0056232596 = product of:
0.011246519 = sum of:
0.011246519 = weight(_text_:29 in 5442) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.011246519 = score(doc=5442,freq=2.0), product of:
0.072342895 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
0.02056547 = 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)
0.025941528 = weight(_text_:notes in 5442) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.025941528 = score(doc=5442,freq=2.0), product of:
0.10987139 = queryWeight, product of:
5.3425174 = idf(docFreq=574, maxDocs=44218)
0.02056547 = queryNorm
0.23610814 = fieldWeight in 5442, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
5.3425174 = idf(docFreq=574, maxDocs=44218)
0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=5442)
0.0050450475 = weight(_text_:in in 5442) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.0050450475 = score(doc=5442,freq=18.0), product of:
0.027974274 = queryWeight, product of:
1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
0.02056547 = queryNorm
0.18034597 = fieldWeight in 5442, product of:
4.2426405 = tf(freq=18.0), with freq of:
18.0 = termFreq=18.0
1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=5442)
0.0031531493 = product of:
0.0063062985 = sum of:
0.0063062985 = weight(_text_:science in 5442) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.0063062985 = score(doc=5442,freq=2.0), product of:
0.0541719 = queryWeight, product of:
2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
0.02056547 = queryNorm
0.11641272 = fieldWeight in 5442, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=5442)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.18181819 = coord(4/22)
- 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.
- Source
- Cataloging and classification quarterly. 33(2001) no.2, S.29-54
-
Gil-Leiva, I.; Alonso-Arroyo, A.: Keywords given by authors of scientific articles in database descriptors (2007)
0.01
0.0059150583 = product of:
0.043377094 = sum of:
0.029578438 = weight(_text_:informatik in 211) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.029578438 = score(doc=211,freq=2.0), product of:
0.104934774 = queryWeight, product of:
5.1024737 = idf(docFreq=730, maxDocs=44218)
0.02056547 = queryNorm
0.2818745 = fieldWeight in 211, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
5.1024737 = idf(docFreq=730, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=211)
0.006971888 = weight(_text_:in in 211) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.006971888 = score(doc=211,freq=22.0), product of:
0.027974274 = queryWeight, product of:
1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
0.02056547 = queryNorm
0.24922498 = fieldWeight in 211, product of:
4.690416 = tf(freq=22.0), with freq of:
22.0 = termFreq=22.0
1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=211)
0.0068267686 = product of:
0.013653537 = sum of:
0.013653537 = weight(_text_:science in 211) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.013653537 = score(doc=211,freq=6.0), product of:
0.0541719 = queryWeight, product of:
2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
0.02056547 = queryNorm
0.25204095 = fieldWeight in 211, product of:
2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
6.0 = termFreq=6.0
2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=211)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.13636364 = coord(3/22)
- Abstract
- In this article, the authors analyze the keywords given by authors of scientific articles and the descriptors assigned to the articles to ascertain the presence of the keywords in the descriptors. Six-hundred forty INSPEC (Information Service for Physics, Engineering, and Computing), CAB (Current Agriculture Bibliography) abstracts, ISTA (Information Science and Technology Abstracts), and LISA (Library and Information Science Abstracts) database records were consulted. After detailed comparisons, it was found that keywords provided by authors have an important presence in the database descriptors studied; nearly 25% of all the keywords appeared in exactly the same form as descriptors, with another 21% though normalized, still detected in the descriptors. This means that almost 46% of keywords appear in the descriptors, either as such or after normalization. Elsewhere, three distinct indexing policies appear, one represented by INSPEC and LISA (indexers seem to have freedom to assign the descriptors they deem necessary); another is represented by CAB (no record has fewer than four descriptors and, in general, a large number of descriptors is employed). In contrast, in ISTA, a certain institutional code exists towards economy in indexing because 84% of records contain only four descriptors.
- Field
- Informatik
- Source
- Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 58(2007) no.8, S.1175-1187
-
Gretz, M.; Thomas, M.: Indexierungen in biomedizinischen Literaturdatenbanken : eine vergleichende Analyse (1991)
0.01
0.005899812 = product of:
0.043265287 = sum of:
0.017470691 = weight(_text_:und in 5104) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.017470691 = score(doc=5104,freq=10.0), product of:
0.04558063 = queryWeight, product of:
2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
0.02056547 = 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)
0.017470691 = weight(_text_:und in 5104) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.017470691 = score(doc=5104,freq=10.0), product of:
0.04558063 = queryWeight, product of:
2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
0.02056547 = 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)
0.008323904 = weight(_text_:in in 5104) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.008323904 = score(doc=5104,freq=16.0), product of:
0.027974274 = queryWeight, product of:
1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
0.02056547 = queryNorm
0.29755569 = fieldWeight in 5104, product of:
4.0 = tf(freq=16.0), with freq of:
16.0 = termFreq=16.0
1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=5104)
0.13636364 = coord(3/22)
- 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
-
Connell, T.H.: Use of the LCSH system : realities (1996)
0.00
0.004662142 = product of:
0.05128356 = sum of:
0.045397673 = weight(_text_:notes in 6941) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.045397673 = score(doc=6941,freq=2.0), product of:
0.10987139 = queryWeight, product of:
5.3425174 = idf(docFreq=574, maxDocs=44218)
0.02056547 = queryNorm
0.41318923 = fieldWeight in 6941, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
5.3425174 = idf(docFreq=574, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=6941)
0.0058858884 = weight(_text_:in in 6941) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.0058858884 = score(doc=6941,freq=8.0), product of:
0.027974274 = queryWeight, product of:
1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
0.02056547 = queryNorm
0.21040362 = fieldWeight in 6941, product of:
2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
8.0 = termFreq=8.0
1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=6941)
0.09090909 = coord(2/22)
- Abstract
- Explores the question of whether academic libraries keep up with the changes in the LCSH system. Analysis of the handling of 15 subject headings in 50 academic library catalogues available via the Internet found that libraries are not consistently maintaining subject authority control, or making syndetic references and scope notes in their catalogues. Discusses the results from the perspective of the libraries' performance, performance on the headings overall, performance on references, performance on the type of change made to the headings,a nd performance within 3 widely used onlien catalogue systems (DRA, INNOPAC and NOTIS). Discusses the implications of the findings in relationship to expressions of dissatisfaction with the effectiveness of subject cataloguing expressed by discussion groups on the Internet
-
Braam, R.R.; Bruil, J.: Quality of indexing information : authors' views on indexing of their articles in chemical abstracts online CA-file (1992)
0.00
0.0042686737 = product of:
0.031303607 = sum of:
0.008366265 = weight(_text_:in in 2638) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.008366265 = score(doc=2638,freq=22.0), product of:
0.027974274 = queryWeight, product of:
1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
0.02056547 = queryNorm
0.29906997 = fieldWeight in 2638, product of:
4.690416 = tf(freq=22.0), with freq of:
22.0 = termFreq=22.0
1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2638)
0.018207615 = weight(_text_:computer in 2638) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.018207615 = score(doc=2638,freq=2.0), product of:
0.0751567 = queryWeight, product of:
3.6545093 = idf(docFreq=3109, maxDocs=44218)
0.02056547 = queryNorm
0.24226204 = fieldWeight in 2638, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.6545093 = idf(docFreq=3109, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2638)
0.0047297236 = product of:
0.009459447 = sum of:
0.009459447 = weight(_text_:science in 2638) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.009459447 = score(doc=2638,freq=2.0), product of:
0.0541719 = queryWeight, product of:
2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
0.02056547 = queryNorm
0.17461908 = fieldWeight in 2638, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2638)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.13636364 = coord(3/22)
- Abstract
- Studies the quality of subject indexing by Chemical Abstracts Indexing Service by confronting authors with the particular indexing terms attributed to their computer, for 270 articles published in 54 journals, 5 articles out of each journal. Responses (80%) indicate the superior quality of keywords, both as content descriptors and as retrieval tools. Author judgements on these 2 different aspects do not always converge, however. CAS's indexing policy to cover only 'new' aspects is reflected in author's judgements that index lists are somewhat incomplete, in particular in the case of thesaurus terms (index headings). The large effort expanded by CAS in maintaining and using a subject thesuaurs, in order to select valid index headings, as compared to quick and cheap keyword postings, does not lead to clear superior quality of thesaurus terms for document description nor in retrieval. Some 20% of papers were not placed in 'proper' CA main section, according to authors. As concerns the use of indexing data by third parties, in bibliometrics, users should be aware of the indexing policies behind the data, in order to prevent invalid interpretations
- Source
- Journal of information science. 18(1992) no.5, S.399-408
-
Harter, S.P.; Cheng, Y.-R.: Colinked descriptors : improving vocabulary selection for end-user searching (1996)
0.00
0.0042124926 = product of:
0.02316871 = sum of:
0.006696969 = weight(_text_:und in 4216) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.006696969 = score(doc=4216,freq=2.0), product of:
0.04558063 = queryWeight, product of:
2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
0.02056547 = 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)
0.006696969 = weight(_text_:und in 4216) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.006696969 = score(doc=4216,freq=2.0), product of:
0.04558063 = queryWeight, product of:
2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
0.02056547 = 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)
0.0050450475 = weight(_text_:in in 4216) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.0050450475 = score(doc=4216,freq=8.0), product of:
0.027974274 = queryWeight, product of:
1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
0.02056547 = queryNorm
0.18034597 = fieldWeight in 4216, product of:
2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
8.0 = termFreq=8.0
1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4216)
0.0047297236 = product of:
0.009459447 = sum of:
0.009459447 = weight(_text_:science in 4216) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.009459447 = score(doc=4216,freq=2.0), product of:
0.0541719 = queryWeight, product of:
2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
0.02056547 = queryNorm
0.17461908 = fieldWeight in 4216, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4216)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.18181819 = coord(4/22)
- Abstract
- This article introduces a new concept and technique for information retrieval called 'colinked descriptors'. Borrowed from an analogous idea in bibliometrics - cocited references - colinked descriptors provide a theory and method for identifying search terms that, by hypothesis, will be superior to those entered initially by a searcher. The theory suggests a means of moving automatically from 2 or more initial search terms, to other terms that should be superior in retrieval performance to the 2 original terms. A research project designed to test this colinked descriptor hypothesis is reported. The results suggest that the approach is effective, although methodological problems in testing the idea are reported. Algorithms to generate colinked descriptors can be incorporated easily into system interfaces, front-end or pre-search systems, or help software, in any database that employs a thesaurus. The potential use of colinked descriptors is a strong argument for building richer and more complex thesauri that reflect as many legitimate links among descriptors as possible
- Source
- Journal of the American Society for Information Science. 47(1996) no.4, S.311-325
- Theme
- Konzeption und Anwendung des Prinzips Thesaurus
-
Chen, X.: Indexing consistency between online catalogues (2008)
0.00
0.0041336026 = product of:
0.030313084 = sum of:
0.013670131 = weight(_text_:und in 2209) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.013670131 = score(doc=2209,freq=12.0), product of:
0.04558063 = queryWeight, product of:
2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
0.02056547 = 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)
0.013670131 = weight(_text_:und in 2209) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.013670131 = score(doc=2209,freq=12.0), product of:
0.04558063 = queryWeight, product of:
2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
0.02056547 = 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)
0.0029728229 = weight(_text_:in in 2209) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.0029728229 = score(doc=2209,freq=4.0), product of:
0.027974274 = queryWeight, product of:
1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
0.02056547 = queryNorm
0.10626988 = fieldWeight in 2209, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2209)
0.13636364 = coord(3/22)
- 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
-
Veenema, F.: To index or not to index (1996)
0.00
0.0037026196 = product of:
0.040728815 = sum of:
0.0058255196 = weight(_text_:in in 7247) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.0058255196 = score(doc=7247,freq=6.0), product of:
0.027974274 = queryWeight, product of:
1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
0.02056547 = queryNorm
0.2082456 = fieldWeight in 7247, product of:
2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
6.0 = termFreq=6.0
1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=7247)
0.034903295 = sum of:
0.012612597 = weight(_text_:science in 7247) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.012612597 = score(doc=7247,freq=2.0), product of:
0.0541719 = queryWeight, product of:
2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
0.02056547 = queryNorm
0.23282544 = fieldWeight in 7247, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=7247)
0.0222907 = weight(_text_:22 in 7247) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.0222907 = score(doc=7247,freq=2.0), product of:
0.072016776 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.02056547 = queryNorm
0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 7247, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=7247)
0.09090909 = coord(2/22)
- Abstract
- Describes an experiment comparing the performance of automatic full-text indexing software for personal computers with the human intellectual assignment of indexing terms in each document in a collection. Considers the times required to index the document, to retrieve documents satisfying 5 typical foreseen information needs, and the recall and precision ratios of searching. The software used is QuickFinder facility in WordPerfect 6.1 for Windows
- Source
- Canadian journal of information and library science. 21(1996) no.2, S.1-22
-
Tinker, F.F.: Imprecision in meaning measured by inconsistency of indexing (1966-68)
0.00
0.0036173777 = product of:
0.026527436 = sum of:
0.011161615 = weight(_text_:und in 2275) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.011161615 = score(doc=2275,freq=2.0), product of:
0.04558063 = queryWeight, product of:
2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
0.02056547 = 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)
0.011161615 = weight(_text_:und in 2275) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.011161615 = score(doc=2275,freq=2.0), product of:
0.04558063 = queryWeight, product of:
2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
0.02056547 = 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)
0.0042042066 = weight(_text_:in in 2275) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.0042042066 = score(doc=2275,freq=2.0), product of:
0.027974274 = queryWeight, product of:
1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
0.02056547 = queryNorm
0.15028831 = fieldWeight in 2275, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=2275)
0.13636364 = coord(3/22)
- 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
-
Chan, L.M.: Inter-indexer consistency in subject cataloging (1989)
0.00
0.0032296504 = product of:
0.023684103 = sum of:
0.008929292 = weight(_text_:und in 2276) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.008929292 = score(doc=2276,freq=2.0), product of:
0.04558063 = queryWeight, product of:
2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
0.02056547 = 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)
0.008929292 = weight(_text_:und in 2276) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.008929292 = score(doc=2276,freq=2.0), product of:
0.04558063 = queryWeight, product of:
2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
0.02056547 = 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)
0.0058255196 = weight(_text_:in in 2276) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.0058255196 = score(doc=2276,freq=6.0), product of:
0.027974274 = queryWeight, product of:
1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
0.02056547 = queryNorm
0.2082456 = fieldWeight in 2276, product of:
2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
6.0 = termFreq=6.0
1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=2276)
0.13636364 = coord(3/22)
- Abstract
- The purpose of the current study has been twofold: (1) to develop a valid methodology for studying indexing consistency in MARC records and, (2) to study such consistency in subject cataloging practice between non-LC libraries and the Library of Congress
- Content
- Die Studie enthält Konsistenzzahlen bezogen auf die LCSH. Diese Zahlen sind kategorienbezogen und können teilweise auf die RSWK übertragen werden
-
Leininger, K.: Interindexer consistency in PsychINFO (2000)
0.00
0.0027769648 = product of:
0.030546611 = sum of:
0.0043691397 = weight(_text_:in in 2552) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.0043691397 = score(doc=2552,freq=6.0), product of:
0.027974274 = queryWeight, product of:
1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
0.02056547 = queryNorm
0.1561842 = fieldWeight in 2552, product of:
2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
6.0 = termFreq=6.0
1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2552)
0.026177472 = sum of:
0.009459447 = weight(_text_:science in 2552) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.009459447 = score(doc=2552,freq=2.0), product of:
0.0541719 = queryWeight, product of:
2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
0.02056547 = queryNorm
0.17461908 = fieldWeight in 2552, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2552)
0.016718024 = weight(_text_:22 in 2552) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.016718024 = score(doc=2552,freq=2.0), product of:
0.072016776 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.02056547 = queryNorm
0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 2552, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2552)
0.09090909 = coord(2/22)
- Abstract
- Reports results of a study to examine interindexer consistency (the degree to which indexers, when assigning terms to a chosen record, will choose the same terms to reflect that record) in the PsycINFO database using 60 records that were inadvertently processed twice between 1996 and 1998. Five aspects of interindexer consistency were analysed. Two methods were used to calculate interindexer consistency: one posited by Hooper (1965) and the other by Rollin (1981). Aspects analysed were: checktag consistency (66.24% using Hooper's calculation and 77.17% using Rollin's); major-to-all term consistency (49.31% and 62.59% respectively); overall indexing consistency (49.02% and 63.32%); classification code consistency (44.17% and 45.00%); and major-to-major term consistency (43.24% and 56.09%). The average consistency across all categories was 50.4% using Hooper's method and 60.83% using Rollin's. Although comparison with previous studies is difficult due to methodological variations in the overall study of indexing consistency and the specific characteristics of the database, results generally support previous findings when trends and similar studies are analysed.
- Date
- 9. 2.1997 18:44:22
- Source
- Journal of librarianship and information science. 32(2000) no.1, S.4-8
-
Bellamy, L.M.; Bickham, L.: Thesaurus development for subject cataloging (1989)
0.00
0.00259561 = product of:
0.019034473 = sum of:
0.006696969 = weight(_text_:und in 2262) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.006696969 = score(doc=2262,freq=2.0), product of:
0.04558063 = queryWeight, product of:
2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
0.02056547 = 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)
0.006696969 = weight(_text_:und in 2262) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.006696969 = score(doc=2262,freq=2.0), product of:
0.04558063 = queryWeight, product of:
2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
0.02056547 = 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)
0.005640535 = weight(_text_:in in 2262) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.005640535 = score(doc=2262,freq=10.0), product of:
0.027974274 = queryWeight, product of:
1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
0.02056547 = queryNorm
0.20163295 = fieldWeight in 2262, product of:
3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
10.0 = termFreq=10.0
1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2262)
0.13636364 = coord(3/22)
- Abstract
- The biomedical book collection in the Genetech Library and Information Services was first inventoried and cataloged in 1983 when it totaled about 2000 titles. Cataloging records were retrieved from the OCLC system and used as a basis for cataloging. A year of cataloging produced a list of 1900 subject terms. More than one term describing the same concept often appears on the list, and no hierarchical structure related the terms to one another. As the collection grew, the subject catalog became increasingly inconsistent. To bring consistency to subject cataloging, a thesaurus of biomedical terms was constructed using the list of subject headings as a basis. This thesaurus follows the broad categories of the National Library of Medicine's Medical Subject Headings and, with some exceptions, the Guidelines for the Establishment and Development of Monolingual Thesauri. It has enabled the cataloger in providing greater in-depth subject analysis of materials added to the collection and in consistently assigning subject headings to cataloging record.
- 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
0.00259561 = product of:
0.019034473 = sum of:
0.006696969 = weight(_text_:und in 2700) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.006696969 = score(doc=2700,freq=2.0), product of:
0.04558063 = queryWeight, product of:
2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
0.02056547 = 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)
0.006696969 = weight(_text_:und in 2700) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.006696969 = score(doc=2700,freq=2.0), product of:
0.04558063 = queryWeight, product of:
2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
0.02056547 = 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)
0.005640535 = weight(_text_:in in 2700) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.005640535 = score(doc=2700,freq=10.0), product of:
0.027974274 = queryWeight, product of:
1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
0.02056547 = queryNorm
0.20163295 = fieldWeight in 2700, product of:
3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
10.0 = termFreq=10.0
1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2700)
0.13636364 = coord(3/22)
- Abstract
- This paper presents the findings of a study of indexing procedure with the use of a thesaurus for post-coordination. In the first phase of the study, the indexing records of 50 books, prepared by a central cataloging service (the Israeli Center for Libraries), were compared with the indexing records for these books prepared by three independent indexers. In the second phase, indexing records for three books prepared by 51 librarians were studied. In both phases, indexing records were analyzed for mistakes and possible reasons for these mistakes are offered.
- Series
- Advances in knowledge organization; vol.8
- Source
- Challenges in knowledge representation and organization for the 21st century: Integration of knowledge across boundaries. Proceedings of the 7th ISKO International Conference Granada, Spain, July 10-13, 2002. Ed.: M. López-Huertas
- Theme
- Konzeption und Anwendung des Prinzips Thesaurus
-
Ansari, M.: Matching between assigned descriptors and title keywords in medical theses (2005)
0.00
0.0024024474 = product of:
0.017617946 = sum of:
0.0070290747 = product of:
0.014058149 = sum of:
0.014058149 = weight(_text_:29 in 4739) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.014058149 = score(doc=4739,freq=2.0), product of:
0.072342895 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
0.02056547 = 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)
0.0066474346 = weight(_text_:in in 4739) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.0066474346 = score(doc=4739,freq=20.0), product of:
0.027974274 = queryWeight, product of:
1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
0.02056547 = queryNorm
0.2376267 = fieldWeight in 4739, product of:
4.472136 = tf(freq=20.0), with freq of:
20.0 = termFreq=20.0
1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4739)
0.0039414368 = product of:
0.0078828735 = sum of:
0.0078828735 = weight(_text_:science in 4739) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.0078828735 = score(doc=4739,freq=2.0), product of:
0.0541719 = queryWeight, product of:
2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
0.02056547 = queryNorm
0.1455159 = fieldWeight in 4739, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4739)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.13636364 = coord(3/22)
- Abstract
- Purpose - To examine the degree of exact and partial match between the assigned descriptors and title keywords of medical theses written in Farsi and submitted for a PhD degree.Design/methodology/approach - A sample population of 506 theses in Pediatrics, Gynecology, Cardiology and Psychiatry was randomly picked out of a total of 909 indexed in the Indexing Department of the Central Library of the Iran University of Medical Science and Health Care Services. The results obtained are compared with those reported for other documents written in Farsi and English. Where applicable, the influence of the foreign language and its structure is commented on.Findings - It is shown that the degree of match between the assigned descriptors and the title keywords is greater than 70 per cent, equaling those reported for Farsi books and Michigan University Library catalogue in USA. It is also shown that the frequency of the match has increased since 1982, indicating that the authors have become more attentive in their choice of title.Research limitations/implications - Detailed analysis of results, however, shows significant differences between the degree of exact match amongst the four categories, with psychiatry theses that use more common terms showing highest exact match findings (50 per cent).Originality/value - This paper highlights the need for a closer collaboration with medical institutions for definition of approved terms and their incorporation in indexation in order to improve findings in various medical categories.
- Date
- 3.12.2005 19:38:29
-
Bade, D.: ¬The creation and persistence of misinformation in shared library catalogs : language and subject knowledge in a technological era (2002)
0.00
0.002367678 = product of:
0.017362973 = sum of:
0.0028116298 = product of:
0.0056232596 = sum of:
0.0056232596 = weight(_text_:29 in 1858) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.0056232596 = score(doc=1858,freq=2.0), product of:
0.072342895 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
0.02056547 = 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)
0.0058255196 = weight(_text_:in in 1858) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.0058255196 = score(doc=1858,freq=96.0), product of:
0.027974274 = queryWeight, product of:
1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
0.02056547 = queryNorm
0.2082456 = fieldWeight in 1858, product of:
9.797959 = tf(freq=96.0), with freq of:
96.0 = termFreq=96.0
1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
0.015625 = fieldNorm(doc=1858)
0.008725824 = sum of:
0.0031531493 = weight(_text_:science in 1858) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.0031531493 = score(doc=1858,freq=2.0), product of:
0.0541719 = queryWeight, product of:
2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
0.02056547 = queryNorm
0.05820636 = fieldWeight in 1858, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
0.015625 = fieldNorm(doc=1858)
0.005572675 = weight(_text_:22 in 1858) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.005572675 = score(doc=1858,freq=2.0), product of:
0.072016776 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.02056547 = 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)
0.13636364 = coord(3/22)
- Date
- 22. 9.1997 19:16:05
- Footnote
- Rez. in JASIST 54(2003) no.4, S.356-357 (S.J. Lincicum): "Reliance upon shared cataloging in academic libraries in the United States has been driven largely by the need to reduce the expense of cataloging operations without muck regard for the Impact that this approach might have an the quality of the records included in local catalogs. In recent years, ever increasing pressures have prompted libraries to adopt practices such as "rapid" copy cataloging that purposely reduce the scrutiny applied to bibliographic records downloaded from shared databases, possibly increasing the number of errors that slip through unnoticed. Errors in bibliographic records can lead to serious problems for library catalog users. If the data contained in bibliographic records is inaccurate, users will have difficulty discovering and recognizing resources in a library's collection that are relevant to their needs. Thus, it has become increasingly important to understand the extent and nature of errors that occur in the records found in large shared bibliographic databases, such as OCLC WorldCat, to develop cataloging practices optimized for the shared cataloging environment. Although this monograph raises a few legitimate concerns about recent trends in cataloging practice, it fails to provide the "detailed look" at misinformation in library catalogs arising from linguistic errors and mistakes in subject analysis promised by the publisher. A basic premise advanced throughout the text is that a certain amount of linguistic and subject knowledge is required to catalog library materials effectively. The author emphasizes repeatedly that most catalogers today are asked to catalog an increasingly diverse array of materials, and that they are often required to work in languages or subject areas of which they have little or no knowledge. He argues that the records contributed to shared databases are increasingly being created by catalogers with inadequate linguistic or subject expertise. This adversely affects the quality of individual library catalogs because errors often go uncorrected as records are downloaded from shared databases to local catalogs by copy catalogers who possess even less knowledge. Calling misinformation an "evil phenomenon," Bade states that his main goal is to discuss, "two fundamental types of misinformation found in bibliographic and authority records in library catalogs: that arising from linguistic errors, and that caused by errors in subject analysis, including missing or wrong subject headings" (p. 2). After a superficial discussion of "other" types of errors that can occur in bibliographic records, such as typographical errors and errors in the application of descriptive cataloging rules, Bade begins his discussion of linguistic errors. He asserts that sharing bibliographic records created by catalogers with inadequate linguistic or subject knowledge has, "disastrous effects an the library community" (p. 6). To support this bold assertion, Bade provides as evidence little more than a laundry list of errors that he has personally observed in bibliographic records over the years. When he eventually cites several studies that have addressed the availability and quality of records available for materials in languages other than English, he fails to describe the findings of these studies in any detail, let alone relate the findings to his own observations in a meaningful way. Bade claims that a lack of linguistic expertise among catalogers is the "primary source for linguistic misinformation in our databases" (p. 10), but he neither cites substantive data from existing studies nor provides any new data regarding the overall level of linguistic knowledge among catalogers to support this claim. The section concludes with a brief list of eight sensible, if unoriginal, suggestions for coping with the challenge of cataloging materials in unfamiliar languages.
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)
- Imprint
- Urbana-Champaign, IL : Illinois University at Urbana-Champaign, Graduate School of Library and Information Science
-
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
0.0020692798 = product of:
0.015174719 = sum of:
0.0070290747 = product of:
0.014058149 = sum of:
0.014058149 = weight(_text_:29 in 383) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.014058149 = score(doc=383,freq=2.0), product of:
0.072342895 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
0.02056547 = 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)
0.0042042066 = weight(_text_:in in 383) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.0042042066 = score(doc=383,freq=8.0), product of:
0.027974274 = queryWeight, product of:
1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
0.02056547 = queryNorm
0.15028831 = fieldWeight in 383, product of:
2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
8.0 = termFreq=8.0
1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=383)
0.0039414368 = product of:
0.0078828735 = sum of:
0.0078828735 = weight(_text_:science in 383) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.0078828735 = score(doc=383,freq=2.0), product of:
0.0541719 = queryWeight, product of:
2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
0.02056547 = queryNorm
0.1455159 = fieldWeight in 383, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=383)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.13636364 = coord(3/22)
- 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
- Source
- Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 63(2012) no.9, S.1747-1757
-
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
0.0019784612 = product of:
0.021763071 = sum of:
0.0050450475 = weight(_text_:in in 6158) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.0050450475 = score(doc=6158,freq=2.0), product of:
0.027974274 = queryWeight, product of:
1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
0.02056547 = queryNorm
0.18034597 = fieldWeight in 6158, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=6158)
0.016718024 = product of:
0.03343605 = sum of:
0.03343605 = weight(_text_:22 in 6158) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.03343605 = score(doc=6158,freq=2.0), product of:
0.072016776 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.02056547 = 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)
0.09090909 = coord(2/22)
- Footnote
- Rez. in: College and research libraries 22(1961) no.3, S.228 (G. Jahoda)
-
Iivonen, M.; Kivimäki, K.: Common entities and missing properties : similarities and differences in the indexing of concepts (1998)
0.00
0.0015611971 = product of:
0.017173167 = sum of:
0.008434889 = product of:
0.016869778 = sum of:
0.016869778 = weight(_text_:29 in 3074) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.016869778 = score(doc=3074,freq=2.0), product of:
0.072342895 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
0.02056547 = queryNorm
0.23319192 = fieldWeight in 3074, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=3074)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.008738279 = weight(_text_:in in 3074) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.008738279 = score(doc=3074,freq=24.0), product of:
0.027974274 = queryWeight, product of:
1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
0.02056547 = queryNorm
0.3123684 = fieldWeight in 3074, product of:
4.8989797 = tf(freq=24.0), with freq of:
24.0 = termFreq=24.0
1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=3074)
0.09090909 = coord(2/22)
- Abstract
- The selection and representation of concepts in indexing of the same documents in 2 databases of library and information studies are considered. the authors compare the indexing of 49 documents in KINF and LISA. They focus on the types of concepts presented in indexing, the degree of concept consistency in indexing, and similarities and differences in the indexing of concepts. The largest group of indexed concepts in both databases was the category of entities while concepts belonging to the category of properties were almost missing in both databases. The second largest group of indexed concepts in KINF was the category of activities and in LISA the category of dimensions. Although the concept consistency between KINF and LISA remained rather low and was only 34%, there were approximately 2,2 concepts per document which were indexed from the same documents in both databses. These common concepts belonged mostly to the category of entities
- Date
- 24. 2.1999 21:29:51
