Search (33 results, page 1 of 2)

  • × language_ss:"e"
  • × author_ss:"Dahlberg, I."
  1. Dahlberg, I.: Toward establishment of compatibility between indexing languages (1981) 0.06
    0.056240328 = product of:
      0.14060082 = sum of:
        0.013347079 = weight(_text_:a in 5218) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.013347079 = score(doc=5218,freq=12.0), product of:
            0.053464882 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046368346 = queryNorm
            0.24964198 = fieldWeight in 5218, product of:
              3.4641016 = tf(freq=12.0), with freq of:
                12.0 = termFreq=12.0
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=5218)
        0.12725374 = weight(_text_:91 in 5218) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.12725374 = score(doc=5218,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.25837386 = queryWeight, product of:
              5.5722036 = idf(docFreq=456, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046368346 = queryNorm
            0.49251786 = fieldWeight in 5218, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              5.5722036 = idf(docFreq=456, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=5218)
      0.4 = coord(2/5)
    
    Abstract
    Outlines previous work done in the field of compatibility between indexing langugaes (IL), and describes the scope, limitations and advantages of establishing compatibility between IL. Suggests methods for verbal comparisons between IL as well as generation of an alphabetical comparison matrix M1. Conceptual comparisons, however, demand a conceptual reorganization of M1 into a compatibiliy matrix M2 with its two alternatices, namely a system-related matrix M3 and a hierarchical matrix M4. In conclusion, the use of a compatibility matrix and organizational problems are described
    Source
    International classification. 8(1981) no.2, S.86-91
    Type
    a
  2. Dahlberg, I.: What is knowledge organization? (2014) 0.05
    0.047235887 = product of:
      0.11808972 = sum of:
        0.0067426977 = weight(_text_:a in 1381) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.0067426977 = score(doc=1381,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.053464882 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046368346 = queryNorm
            0.12611452 = fieldWeight in 1381, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=1381)
        0.11134702 = weight(_text_:91 in 1381) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.11134702 = score(doc=1381,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.25837386 = queryWeight, product of:
              5.5722036 = idf(docFreq=456, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046368346 = queryNorm
            0.43095312 = fieldWeight in 1381, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              5.5722036 = idf(docFreq=456, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=1381)
      0.4 = coord(2/5)
    
    Abstract
    As an introduction, the circumstances leading to the foundation of the International Society for Knowledge Organization (ISKO) are outlined and the prerequisites for the formal and conceptual description of the scope of knowledge organization (KO) are laid out, followed by the explanation of the scheme as used in the bibliography of KO. An overview is provided of the tasks and activities of this discipline; thereafter and in conclusion an urgent appeal is made to ISKO and to all active scientific societies with a view to establishing KO as an autonomous scientific discipline within the science of science, as well as an indication is given of urgently required tasks.
    Source
    Knowledge organization. 41(2014) no.1, S.85-91
    Type
    a
  3. Dahlberg, I.: Conceptual definitions for INTERCONCEPT (1981) 0.03
    0.030578006 = product of:
      0.07644501 = sum of:
        0.013622305 = weight(_text_:a in 1630) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.013622305 = score(doc=1630,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.053464882 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046368346 = queryNorm
            0.25478977 = fieldWeight in 1630, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.15625 = fieldNorm(doc=1630)
        0.06282271 = product of:
          0.12564541 = sum of:
            0.12564541 = weight(_text_:22 in 1630) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.12564541 = score(doc=1630,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.16237405 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.046368346 = queryNorm
                0.77380234 = fieldWeight in 1630, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.15625 = fieldNorm(doc=1630)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.4 = coord(2/5)
    
    Source
    International classification. 8(1981), S.16-22
    Type
    a
  4. De Luca, E.W.; Dahlberg, I.: Including knowledge domains from the ICC into the multilingual lexical linked data cloud (2014) 0.03
    0.026808461 = product of:
      0.067021154 = sum of:
        0.0068111527 = weight(_text_:a in 1493) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.0068111527 = score(doc=1493,freq=8.0), product of:
            0.053464882 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046368346 = queryNorm
            0.12739488 = fieldWeight in 1493, product of:
              2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
                8.0 = termFreq=8.0
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1493)
        0.060210004 = sum of:
          0.015787644 = weight(_text_:information in 1493) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
            0.015787644 = score(doc=1493,freq=8.0), product of:
              0.08139861 = queryWeight, product of:
                1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
                0.046368346 = queryNorm
              0.19395474 = fieldWeight in 1493, product of:
                2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
                  8.0 = termFreq=8.0
                1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
                0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1493)
          0.044422362 = weight(_text_:22 in 1493) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
            0.044422362 = score(doc=1493,freq=4.0), product of:
              0.16237405 = queryWeight, product of:
                3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                0.046368346 = queryNorm
              0.27358043 = fieldWeight in 1493, product of:
                2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                  4.0 = termFreq=4.0
                3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1493)
      0.4 = coord(2/5)
    
    Abstract
    A lot of information that is already available on the Web, or retrieved from local information systems and social networks is structured in data silos that are not semantically related. Semantic technologies make it emerge that the use of typed links that directly express their relations are an advantage for every application that can reuse the incorporated knowledge about the data. For this reason, data integration, through reengineering (e.g. triplify), or querying (e.g. D2R) is an important task in order to make information available for everyone. Thus, in order to build a semantic map of the data, we need knowledge about data items itself and the relation between heterogeneous data items. In this paper, we present our work of providing Lexical Linked Data (LLD) through a meta-model that contains all the resources and gives the possibility to retrieve and navigate them from different perspectives. We combine the existing work done on knowledge domains (based on the Information Coding Classification) within the Multilingual Lexical Linked Data Cloud (based on the RDF/OWL EurowordNet and the related integrated lexical resources (MultiWordNet, EuroWordNet, MEMODATA Lexicon, Hamburg Methaphor DB).
    Date
    22. 9.2014 19:01:18
    Source
    Knowledge organization in the 21st century: between historical patterns and future prospects. Proceedings of the Thirteenth International ISKO Conference 19-22 May 2014, Kraków, Poland. Ed.: Wieslaw Babik
    Type
    a
  5. Dahlberg, I.: Historical paradigms in the philosophy of classification (1994) 0.01
    0.010065834 = product of:
      0.025164586 = sum of:
        0.009535614 = weight(_text_:a in 8899) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.009535614 = score(doc=8899,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.053464882 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046368346 = queryNorm
            0.17835285 = fieldWeight in 8899, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=8899)
        0.015628971 = product of:
          0.031257942 = sum of:
            0.031257942 = weight(_text_:information in 8899) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.031257942 = score(doc=8899,freq=4.0), product of:
                0.08139861 = queryWeight, product of:
                  1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.046368346 = queryNorm
                0.3840108 = fieldWeight in 8899, product of:
                  2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                    4.0 = termFreq=4.0
                  1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=8899)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.4 = coord(2/5)
    
    Imprint
    Medford; NJ : Learned Information
    Source
    The economics of information. ASIS'94. Proc. 57th ASIS Annual Meeting, Alexandria, VA, Oct. 17-20, 1994. Ed.: B. Maxian
    Type
    a
  6. Dahlberg, I.: Towards a future for knowledge organization (2006) 0.01
    0.008150326 = product of:
      0.020375814 = sum of:
        0.009437811 = weight(_text_:a in 1476) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.009437811 = score(doc=1476,freq=6.0), product of:
            0.053464882 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046368346 = queryNorm
            0.17652355 = fieldWeight in 1476, product of:
              2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
                6.0 = termFreq=6.0
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=1476)
        0.010938003 = product of:
          0.021876005 = sum of:
            0.021876005 = weight(_text_:information in 1476) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.021876005 = score(doc=1476,freq=6.0), product of:
                0.08139861 = queryWeight, product of:
                  1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.046368346 = queryNorm
                0.2687516 = fieldWeight in 1476, product of:
                  2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
                    6.0 = termFreq=6.0
                  1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=1476)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.4 = coord(2/5)
    
    Abstract
    Discusses the origin and evolution of the Information Coding Classification (ICC); its theoretical basis, and structure and advantageous attributes for organizing knowledge. Pleads that the considerable work already done on the system should be taken up and developed by interested research groups through collaborative effort. Concludes with some thoughts on the future of knowledge organization for information retrieval and other applications
    Source
    Knowledge organization, information systems and other essays: Professor A. Neelameghan Festschrift. Eds.: K.S. Raghavan u. K.N. Prasad
    Type
    a
  7. Dahlberg, I.: Why a new universal classification system is needed (2017) 0.01
    0.0073902505 = product of:
      0.018475626 = sum of:
        0.010661141 = weight(_text_:a in 3614) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.010661141 = score(doc=3614,freq=10.0), product of:
            0.053464882 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046368346 = queryNorm
            0.19940455 = fieldWeight in 3614, product of:
              3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
                10.0 = termFreq=10.0
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=3614)
        0.007814486 = product of:
          0.015628971 = sum of:
            0.015628971 = weight(_text_:information in 3614) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.015628971 = score(doc=3614,freq=4.0), product of:
                0.08139861 = queryWeight, product of:
                  1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.046368346 = queryNorm
                0.1920054 = fieldWeight in 3614, product of:
                  2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                    4.0 = termFreq=4.0
                  1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=3614)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.4 = coord(2/5)
    
    Abstract
    Research history of the last 70 years highlights various systems for contents assessment and retrieval of scientific literature, such as universal classifications, thesauri, ontologies etc., which have followed developments of their own, notwithstanding a general trend towards interoperability, i.e. either to become instruments for cooperation or to widen their scope to encompass neighbouring fields within their framework. In the case of thesauri and ontologies, the endeavour to upgrade them into a universal system was bound to miscarry. This paper purports to indicate ways to gain from past experience and possibly rally material achievements while updating and promoting the ontologically-based faceted Information Coding Classification as a progressive universal system fit for meeting whatever requirements in the fields of information and science at large.
    Type
    a
  8. Dahlberg, I.: On the theory of the concept (1979) 0.01
    0.007058388 = product of:
      0.01764597 = sum of:
        0.008173384 = weight(_text_:a in 1615) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.008173384 = score(doc=1615,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.053464882 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046368346 = queryNorm
            0.15287387 = fieldWeight in 1615, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=1615)
        0.009472587 = product of:
          0.018945174 = sum of:
            0.018945174 = weight(_text_:information in 1615) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.018945174 = score(doc=1615,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.08139861 = queryWeight, product of:
                  1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.046368346 = queryNorm
                0.23274569 = fieldWeight in 1615, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=1615)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.4 = coord(2/5)
    
    Source
    Ordering systems for global information networks. Proc. of the 3rd Int. Study Conf. on Classification Research, Bombay 1975
    Type
    a
  9. Dahlberg, I.: ICC - Information Coding Classification : principles, structure and application possibilities (1982) 0.01
    0.007004201 = product of:
      0.017510502 = sum of:
        0.010812371 = weight(_text_:a in 1238) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.010812371 = score(doc=1238,freq=14.0), product of:
            0.053464882 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046368346 = queryNorm
            0.20223314 = fieldWeight in 1238, product of:
              3.7416575 = tf(freq=14.0), with freq of:
                14.0 = termFreq=14.0
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1238)
        0.0066981306 = product of:
          0.013396261 = sum of:
            0.013396261 = weight(_text_:information in 1238) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.013396261 = score(doc=1238,freq=4.0), product of:
                0.08139861 = queryWeight, product of:
                  1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.046368346 = queryNorm
                0.16457605 = fieldWeight in 1238, product of:
                  2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                    4.0 = termFreq=4.0
                  1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1238)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.4 = coord(2/5)
    
    Abstract
    Presentation of the design, characteristics and application possibilities of a new universal classification system called ICC which is based on the premises that whenever information is to be generated or to be presented (in coded form) at least two items are necessary one of which plays the part of a subject and the other one that of the predicate of a sentence, with both these items being framed into a third one. The first basic division is by the categorial concepts denoting general entities and general aspects/determinations of being, framed into an evolutionary pattern of levels creating the 81 subject groups of ICC. Each of these subject groups is structured by a socalled systematifier, applying a recurring series of facets. The overall structure is explained and some of its application fields are outlined
    Type
    a
  10. Dahlberg, I.: Knowledge organization : its scope and possibilities (1993) 0.01
    0.0068851607 = product of:
      0.017212901 = sum of:
        0.010897844 = weight(_text_:a in 6315) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.010897844 = score(doc=6315,freq=8.0), product of:
            0.053464882 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046368346 = queryNorm
            0.20383182 = fieldWeight in 6315, product of:
              2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
                8.0 = termFreq=8.0
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=6315)
        0.006315058 = product of:
          0.012630116 = sum of:
            0.012630116 = weight(_text_:information in 6315) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.012630116 = score(doc=6315,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.08139861 = queryWeight, product of:
                  1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.046368346 = queryNorm
                0.1551638 = fieldWeight in 6315, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=6315)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.4 = coord(2/5)
    
    Abstract
    Sketch of historical development of knowledge organization and presentation of its scope as shown by the contents of the literature service, now called 'Knowledge Organization Literature'. The scheme is explained and shown on its three levels as well as its correlation to a universal classification system of knowledge fields, the 'Information Coding Classification'. The possibilities of Knowledge Organization as a help for everybody, especially also students and above all students of education, and a help for political, industrial and social leaders are discussed. 10 measures for consideration and activation are listed
    Type
    a
  11. Dahlberg, I.: Knowledge organization : a new science? (2006) 0.01
    0.0068817483 = product of:
      0.01720437 = sum of:
        0.011678694 = weight(_text_:a in 3375) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.011678694 = score(doc=3375,freq=12.0), product of:
            0.053464882 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046368346 = queryNorm
            0.21843673 = fieldWeight in 3375, product of:
              3.4641016 = tf(freq=12.0), with freq of:
                12.0 = termFreq=12.0
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=3375)
        0.005525676 = product of:
          0.011051352 = sum of:
            0.011051352 = weight(_text_:information in 3375) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.011051352 = score(doc=3375,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.08139861 = queryWeight, product of:
                  1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.046368346 = queryNorm
                0.13576832 = fieldWeight in 3375, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=3375)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.4 = coord(2/5)
    
    Abstract
    In ISKO's name, the term "Knowledge Organization" (KO) denotes already the object and the activity area significant for the existence of any science. Both areas are outlined and their specific contents shown. Also a survey of its special subfields is given. The sciencetheoretical foundation of Knowledge Organization as a new scientific discipline is based on the propositional concept of science. Within a universal system of the sciences, KO has been regarded as a subfield of Science of Science. Concludingly it is proposed to find the necessary institution for work in concerted effort of scientists, knowledge organizers and terminologists on the collection, definition, and systematization of concepts of all subject fields, utilizing the Information Coding Classification (ICC) as the necessary categorizing structure.
    Type
    a
  12. Dahlberg, I.: Conceptual structures and systematization (1995) 0.01
    0.006654713 = product of:
      0.016636781 = sum of:
        0.00770594 = weight(_text_:a in 3965) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.00770594 = score(doc=3965,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.053464882 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046368346 = queryNorm
            0.14413087 = fieldWeight in 3965, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=3965)
        0.0089308405 = product of:
          0.017861681 = sum of:
            0.017861681 = weight(_text_:information in 3965) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.017861681 = score(doc=3965,freq=4.0), product of:
                0.08139861 = queryWeight, product of:
                  1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.046368346 = queryNorm
                0.21943474 = fieldWeight in 3965, product of:
                  2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                    4.0 = termFreq=4.0
                  1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=3965)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.4 = coord(2/5)
    
    Abstract
    Examines the nature of knowledge and the relationship between the transfer of knowledge and information communication. Discusses the 3 kinds of relationships existing between concepts: formal; form-categorical; and material relationships, and characteristics of concepts. Concludes with a discussion of conceptual structures for concept definitions, conceptual systematization , concept systematization and functionality, and the analytical, referent-oriented concept theory
    Source
    International forum on information and documentation. 20(1995) no.3, S.9-24
    Type
    a
  13. Dahlberg, I.: Library catalogs in the Internet : switching for future subject access (1996) 0.01
    0.0065180818 = product of:
      0.016295204 = sum of:
        0.01155891 = weight(_text_:a in 5171) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.01155891 = score(doc=5171,freq=16.0), product of:
            0.053464882 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046368346 = queryNorm
            0.2161963 = fieldWeight in 5171, product of:
              4.0 = tf(freq=16.0), with freq of:
                16.0 = termFreq=16.0
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=5171)
        0.0047362936 = product of:
          0.009472587 = sum of:
            0.009472587 = weight(_text_:information in 5171) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.009472587 = score(doc=5171,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.08139861 = queryWeight, product of:
                  1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.046368346 = queryNorm
                0.116372846 = fieldWeight in 5171, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=5171)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.4 = coord(2/5)
    
    Abstract
    A multitude of library catalogs are now being entered into the Internet. Their differing classification and subject headings systems used for subject access call for a switching system, a black box to facilitate the location of subject fields and their subjects in these systems. The principles on which such a switching system must be built in order to provide the necessary insight, surveyability, reproducebility and ease of concept combinability (e.g. in cases of interdisciplinary subjects) are outlined and compared with the BSO which hance once been established by the FID in order to serve a switching purpose. The advantages of using the Information Coding Classification (ICC) as a switching system in the Internet are demonstrated, likewise the methodology needed to establish the necessary correlation between library classification systems (and if possible also subject heading systems and thesauri) and the ICC. Finally some organizational implications for creating a switching for 6 universal systems in use are described
    Type
    a
  14. Dahlberg, I.: ¬A faceted classification of general concepts (2011) 0.01
    0.005886516 = product of:
      0.01471629 = sum of:
        0.010769378 = weight(_text_:a in 4824) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.010769378 = score(doc=4824,freq=20.0), product of:
            0.053464882 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046368346 = queryNorm
            0.20142901 = fieldWeight in 4824, product of:
              4.472136 = tf(freq=20.0), with freq of:
                20.0 = termFreq=20.0
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4824)
        0.003946911 = product of:
          0.007893822 = sum of:
            0.007893822 = weight(_text_:information in 4824) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.007893822 = score(doc=4824,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.08139861 = queryWeight, product of:
                  1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.046368346 = queryNorm
                0.09697737 = fieldWeight in 4824, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4824)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.4 = coord(2/5)
    
    Abstract
    General concepts are all those form-categorial concepts which - attached to a specific concept of a classification system or thesaurus - can help to widen, sometimes even in a syntactical sense, the understanding of a case. In some existing universal classification systems such concepts have been named "auxiliaries" or "common isolates" as in the Colon Classification (CC). However, by such auxiliaries, different kinds of such concepts are listed, e.g. concepts of space and time, concepts of races and languages and concepts of kinds of documents, next to them also concepts of kinds of general activities, properties, persons, and institutions. Such latter kinds form part of the nine aspects ruling the facets in the Information Coding Classification (ICC) through the principle of using a Systematiser for the subdivision of subject groups and fields. Based on this principle and using and extending existing systems of such concepts, e.g. which A. Diemer had presented to the German Thesaurus Committee as well as those found in the UDC, in CC and attached to the Subject Heading System of the German National Library, a faceted classification is proposed for critical assessment, necessary improvement and possible later use in classification systems and thesauri.
    Source
    Classification and ontology: formal approaches and access to knowledge: proceedings of the International UDC Seminar, 19-20 September 2011, The Hague, The Netherlands. Eds.: A. Slavic u. E. Civallero
    Type
    a
  15. Dahlberg, I.: ¬The Information Coding Classification (ICC) : a modern, theory-based fully-faceted, universal system of knowledge fields (2008) 0.01
    0.0058368337 = product of:
      0.014592084 = sum of:
        0.009010308 = weight(_text_:a in 1854) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.009010308 = score(doc=1854,freq=14.0), product of:
            0.053464882 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046368346 = queryNorm
            0.1685276 = fieldWeight in 1854, product of:
              3.7416575 = tf(freq=14.0), with freq of:
                14.0 = termFreq=14.0
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1854)
        0.0055817757 = product of:
          0.011163551 = sum of:
            0.011163551 = weight(_text_:information in 1854) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.011163551 = score(doc=1854,freq=4.0), product of:
                0.08139861 = queryWeight, product of:
                  1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.046368346 = queryNorm
                0.13714671 = fieldWeight in 1854, product of:
                  2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                    4.0 = termFreq=4.0
                  1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1854)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.4 = coord(2/5)
    
    Abstract
    Introduction into the structure, contents and specifications (especially the Systematifier) of the Information Coding Classification, developed in the seventies and used in many ways by the author and a few others following its publication in 1982. Its theoretical basis is explained consisting in (1) the Integrative Level Theory, following an evolutionary approach of ontical areas, and integrating also on each level the aspects contained in the sequence of the levels, (2) the distinction between categories of form and categories of being, (3) the application of a feature of Systems Theory (namely the element position plan) and (4) the inclusion of a concept theory, distinguishing four kinds of relationships, originated by the kinds of characteristics (which are the elements of concepts to be derived from the statements on the properties of referents of concepts). Its special Subject Groups on each of its nine levels are outlined and the combinatory facilities at certain positions of the Systematifier are shown. Further elaboration and use have been suggested, be it only as a switching language between the six existing universal classification systems at present in use internationally.
    Content
    Beitrag eines Themenheftes "Facets: a fruitful notion in many domains".
    Type
    a
  16. Dahlberg, I.: ¬The future of classification in libraries and networks : a theoretical point of view (1995) 0.01
    0.005431735 = product of:
      0.013579337 = sum of:
        0.009632425 = weight(_text_:a in 5563) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.009632425 = score(doc=5563,freq=16.0), product of:
            0.053464882 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046368346 = queryNorm
            0.18016359 = fieldWeight in 5563, product of:
              4.0 = tf(freq=16.0), with freq of:
                16.0 = termFreq=16.0
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=5563)
        0.003946911 = product of:
          0.007893822 = sum of:
            0.007893822 = weight(_text_:information in 5563) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.007893822 = score(doc=5563,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.08139861 = queryWeight, product of:
                  1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.046368346 = queryNorm
                0.09697737 = fieldWeight in 5563, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=5563)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.4 = coord(2/5)
    
    Abstract
    Some time ago, some people said classification is dead, we don't need it any more. They probably thought that subject headings could do the job of the necessary subject analysis and shelving of books. However, all of a sudden in 1984 the attitude changed, when an OCLC study of Karen Markey started to show what could be done even with an "outdated system" such as the Dewey Decimal Classification in the computer, once it was visible on a screen to show the helpfulness of a classified library catalogue called an OPAC; classification was brought back into the minds of doubtful librarians and of all those who thought they would not need it any longer. But the problem once phrased: "We are stuck with the two old systems, LCC and DDC" would not find a solution and is still with us today. We know that our systems are outdated but we seem still to be unable to replace them with better ones. What then should one do and advise, knowing that we need something better? Perhaps a new universal ordering system which more adequately represents and mediates the world of our present day knowledge? If we were to develop it from scratch, how would we create it and implement it in such a way that it would be acceptable to the majority of the present intellectual world population?
    Footnote
    Paper presented at the 36th Allerton Institute, 23-25 Oct 94, Allerton Park, Monticello, IL: "New Roles for Classification in Libraries and Information Networks: Presentation and Reports"
    Type
    a
  17. Dahlberg, I.: International Society for Knowledge Organization (ISKO) (2009) 0.00
    0.004592163 = product of:
      0.011480408 = sum of:
        0.005898632 = weight(_text_:a in 4693) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.005898632 = score(doc=4693,freq=6.0), product of:
            0.053464882 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046368346 = queryNorm
            0.11032722 = fieldWeight in 4693, product of:
              2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
                6.0 = termFreq=6.0
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4693)
        0.0055817757 = product of:
          0.011163551 = sum of:
            0.011163551 = weight(_text_:information in 4693) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.011163551 = score(doc=4693,freq=4.0), product of:
                0.08139861 = queryWeight, product of:
                  1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.046368346 = queryNorm
                0.13714671 = fieldWeight in 4693, product of:
                  2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                    4.0 = termFreq=4.0
                  1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4693)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.4 = coord(2/5)
    
    Abstract
    The aims, tasks, activities, and achievements of the International Society for Knowledge Organization (1989-) are presented. ISKO is that group of scholars and practitioners who feel responsible for questions pertaining to the conceptual organization and processing of knowledge, the scientific bases of which lie in knowledge drawn from the fields of logic, organization science, psychology, science theory, informatics, semiotics, linguistics, and philosophy. It aims at giving advice in the construction, perfection, and application of such organizational tools as classification systems, taxonomies, thesauri, terminologies, as well as their use for indexing purposes and thereby for the retrieval of information. Events leading up to the founding of ISKO in 1989 are described. The aims and objectives of ISKO according to its statutes are mentioned, as well as its organization, its biennial international conferences with their proceedings volumes, and the establishment of a further conference series and a textbook series. The drive and success of coordinators in establishing chapters in many countries is reviewed as well. The activities of the chapters (mainly by their own meetings and conferences) and subsequently their publications during the past years are also included. The idea and structure of ISKO's official journal-Knowledge Organization-is explained, and ISKO's Web site is given. Finally, the need for the Society is discussed, and its possible future is considered.
    Source
    Encyclopedia of library and information sciences. 3rd ed. Ed. M.J. Bates
    Type
    a
  18. Dahlberg, I.: How to improve ISKO's standing : ten desiderata for knowledge organization (2011) 0.00
    0.0035976924 = product of:
      0.008994231 = sum of:
        0.0070207757 = weight(_text_:a in 4300) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.0070207757 = score(doc=4300,freq=34.0), product of:
            0.053464882 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046368346 = queryNorm
            0.13131565 = fieldWeight in 4300, product of:
              5.8309517 = tf(freq=34.0), with freq of:
                34.0 = termFreq=34.0
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.01953125 = fieldNorm(doc=4300)
        0.0019734555 = product of:
          0.003946911 = sum of:
            0.003946911 = weight(_text_:information in 4300) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.003946911 = score(doc=4300,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.08139861 = queryWeight, product of:
                  1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.046368346 = queryNorm
                0.048488684 = fieldWeight in 4300, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.01953125 = fieldNorm(doc=4300)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.4 = coord(2/5)
    
    Abstract
    In 2009 ISKO had its 20th anniversary, a time for review and reflection on what might be envisaged to further Knowledge Organization in the forthcoming years. In addition to some proposals set forth at the end of this contribution, ten desiderata appear urgent. A preliminary condition to any other consideration is the recognition of the fundamental difference in the organization of knowledge between the concept (i.e., the unit of knowledge)-the conceptual level-and the word, term or code-the verbal level-and the need for implementing this distinction in theory and practice (Desideratum 1). On this basis, some further proposals are enunciated. The 2nd proposition concerns the surveying of extant classification systems, thesauri, and other means of organizing, ordering, and indexing knowledge; the 3rd proposition envisages the improvement of expert training in Knowledge Organization (KO), also with regard to curricula and professional acknowledgment. Nr.4) refers to the professionalization of the hitherto rather neglected national ISKO secretariats, as well as the international ISKO secretariat. Nr.5) urges a systematic survey of KO-relevant concepts to serve as a model or standard for other subject fields, Nr.6) claims the establishment of KO Institutes, Nr.7) views consultancy to the effect that anybody interested in KO may approach ISKO for help, Nr 8) urges ISKO's promotion of membership and chapters in as many countries as possible, Nr.9) presses for intensification of ISKO's publication activities, and Nr.10) pleads for KO as a scientific discipline on its own.
    Content
    1. Recognize the units in an order system (classification system, thesaurus, ontology, etc.) as concepts/knowledge units, analyse their essential characteristics, and use these characteristics when creating a Knowledge Order System. 2. Recognize the units in an order system (classification system, thesaurus, ontology, etc.) as concepts/knowledge units, analyse their essential characteristics, and use these characteristics when creating a Knowledge Order System. 3. An ISKO group should elaborate a curriculum for the various KO activities to be published after approval by the ISKO Executive Board (EB). Together with this, the qualifying titles of different professionals (teacher, professor, system designer etc.) should also be discussed by the ISKO EB, adopted and proposed for acknowledgement by official institutions; and, 2) It may be possible for ISKO to establish its own Academy and also take care of teaching with the elaborated curricula. 4. Every national ISKO Chapter and the General Secretariat should make efforts to employ a paid expert for the necessary secretarial work, and seek financial support therefore from national or international organizations, in order to become more professionalised. 5. The ISKO Executive Board should decide to elaborate and publish an order system of all KO-relevant concepts to serve as a model and perhaps sometimes as a standard for similar work in other scientific disciplines and knowledge fields.
    6. Establishment of national Knowledge Organization Institutes should be scheduled by national chapters, planned energetically and submitted to corresponding administrative authorities for support. They could be attached to research institutions, e.g., the Max-Planck or Fraunhofer Institutes in Germany or to universities. Their scope and research areas relate to the elaboration of knowledge systems of subject related concepts, according to Desideratum 1, and may be connected to training activities and KOsubject-related research work. 7. ISKO experts should not accept to be impressed by Internet and Computer Science, but should demonstrate their expertise more actively on the public plane. They should tend to take a leading part in the ISKO Secretariats and the KO Institutes, and act as consultants and informants, as well as editors of statistics and other publications. 8. All colleagues trained in the field of classification/indexing and thesauri construction and active in different countries should be identified and approached for membership in ISKO. This would have to be accomplished by the General Secretariat with the collaboration of the experts in the different secretariats of the countries, as soon as they start to work. The more members ISKO will have, the greater will be its reputation and influence. But it will also prove its professionalism by the quality of its products, especially its innovating conceptual order systems to come. 9. ISKO should-especially in view of global expansion-intensify the promotion of knowledge about its own subject area through the publications mentioned here and in further publications as deemed necessary. It should be made clear that, especially in ISKO's own publications, professional subject indexes are a sine qua non. 10. 1) Knowledge Organization, having arisen from librarianship and documentation, the contents of which has many points of contact with numerous application fields, should-although still linked up with its areas of descent-be recognized in the long run as an independent autonomous discipline to be located under the science of science, since only thereby can it fully play its role as an equal partner in all application fields; and, 2) An "at-a-first-glance knowledge order" could be implemented through the Information Coding Classification (ICC), as this system is based on an entirely new approach, namely based on general object areas, thus deviating from discipline-oriented main classes of the current main universal classification systems. It can therefore recoup by simple display on screen the hitherto lost overview of all knowledge areas and fields. On "one look", one perceives 9 object areas subdivided into 9 aspects which break down into 81 subject areas with their 729 subject fields, including further special fields. The synthesis and place of order of all knowledge becomes thus evident at a glance to everybody. Nobody would any longer be irritated by the abundance of singular apparently unrelated knowledge fields or become hesitant in his/her understanding of the world.
    Footnote
    Slightly revised translation into English of a contribution given at the 11th German ISKO Conference, Bonn, 19-21 Oct.2009. Vgl.: http://www.ergon-verlag.de/isko_ko/downloads/ko_38_2011_1g.pdf.
    Type
    a
  19. Dahlberg, I.: Principles for the construction of a universal classification system : a proposal (1978) 0.00
    0.003303234 = product of:
      0.01651617 = sum of:
        0.01651617 = weight(_text_:a in 67) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.01651617 = score(doc=67,freq=6.0), product of:
            0.053464882 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046368346 = queryNorm
            0.3089162 = fieldWeight in 67, product of:
              2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
                6.0 = termFreq=6.0
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=67)
      0.2 = coord(1/5)
    
    Type
    a
  20. Dahlberg, I.: Ingetraut Dahlberg : a brief self report (1998) 0.00
    0.002724461 = product of:
      0.013622305 = sum of:
        0.013622305 = weight(_text_:a in 2510) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.013622305 = score(doc=2510,freq=8.0), product of:
            0.053464882 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046368346 = queryNorm
            0.25478977 = fieldWeight in 2510, product of:
              2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
                8.0 = termFreq=8.0
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=2510)
      0.2 = coord(1/5)
    
    Abstract
    Ingetraut Dahlberg presents a brief description of her career and involvement with cataloguing and classification schemes
    Footnote
    Articles included in an issue devoted to part 1 of a 2 part series celebrating people who have been leaders in the field of cataloguing and classification
    Type
    a