Search (943 results, page 1 of 48)

  • × language_ss:"e"
  • × type_ss:"el"
  1. Popper, K.R.: Three worlds : the Tanner lecture on human values. Deliverd at the University of Michigan, April 7, 1978 (1978) 0.24
    0.24297525 = product of:
      0.40495872 = sum of:
        0.09819364 = product of:
          0.2945809 = sum of:
            0.2945809 = weight(_text_:3a in 230) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.2945809 = score(doc=230,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.39311135 = queryWeight, product of:
                  8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.046368346 = queryNorm
                0.7493574 = fieldWeight in 230, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=230)
          0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
        0.012184162 = weight(_text_:a in 230) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.012184162 = score(doc=230,freq=10.0), product of:
            0.053464882 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046368346 = queryNorm
            0.22789092 = fieldWeight in 230, product of:
              3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
                10.0 = termFreq=10.0
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=230)
        0.2945809 = weight(_text_:2f in 230) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.2945809 = score(doc=230,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.39311135 = queryWeight, product of:
              8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046368346 = queryNorm
            0.7493574 = fieldWeight in 230, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=230)
      0.6 = coord(3/5)
    
    Abstract
    In this lecture I intend to challenge those who uphold a monist or even a dualist view of the universe; and I will propose, instead, a pluralist view. I will propose a view of the universe that recognizes at least three different but interacting sub-universes.
    Source
    https%3A%2F%2Ftannerlectures.utah.edu%2F_documents%2Fa-to-z%2Fp%2Fpopper80.pdf&usg=AOvVaw3f4QRTEH-OEBmoYr2J_c7H
    Type
    a
  2. Kleineberg, M.: Context analysis and context indexing : formal pragmatics in knowledge organization (2014) 0.20
    0.19638728 = product of:
      0.4909682 = sum of:
        0.12274205 = product of:
          0.36822614 = sum of:
            0.36822614 = weight(_text_:3a in 1826) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.36822614 = score(doc=1826,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.39311135 = queryWeight, product of:
                  8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.046368346 = queryNorm
                0.93669677 = fieldWeight in 1826, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=1826)
          0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
        0.36822614 = weight(_text_:2f in 1826) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.36822614 = score(doc=1826,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.39311135 = queryWeight, product of:
              8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046368346 = queryNorm
            0.93669677 = fieldWeight in 1826, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
              0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=1826)
      0.4 = coord(2/5)
    
    Source
    http://www.google.de/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=5&ved=0CDQQFjAE&url=http%3A%2F%2Fdigbib.ubka.uni-karlsruhe.de%2Fvolltexte%2Fdocuments%2F3131107&ei=HzFWVYvGMsiNsgGTyoFI&usg=AFQjCNE2FHUeR9oQTQlNC4TPedv4Mo3DaQ&sig2=Rlzpr7a3BLZZkqZCXXN_IA&bvm=bv.93564037,d.bGg&cad=rja
  3. Svensson, L.G.; Jahns, Y.: PDF, CSV, RSS and other Acronyms : redefining the bibliographic services in the German National Library (2010) 0.07
    0.0744237 = product of:
      0.12403949 = sum of:
        0.0076151006 = weight(_text_:a in 3970) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.0076151006 = score(doc=3970,freq=10.0), product of:
            0.053464882 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046368346 = queryNorm
            0.14243183 = fieldWeight in 3970, product of:
              3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
                10.0 = termFreq=10.0
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3970)
        0.11247748 = weight(_text_:91 in 3970) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.11247748 = score(doc=3970,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.25837386 = queryWeight, product of:
              5.5722036 = idf(docFreq=456, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046368346 = queryNorm
            0.43532842 = fieldWeight in 3970, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              5.5722036 = idf(docFreq=456, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3970)
        0.003946911 = product of:
          0.007893822 = sum of:
            0.007893822 = weight(_text_:information in 3970) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.007893822 = score(doc=3970,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.08139861 = queryWeight, product of:
                  1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.046368346 = queryNorm
                0.09697737 = fieldWeight in 3970, 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=3970)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.6 = coord(3/5)
    
    Abstract
    In January 2010, the German National Library discontinued the print version of the national bibliography and replaced it with an online journal. This was the first step in a longer process of redefining the National Library's bibliographic services, leaving the field of traditional media - e. g. paper or CD-ROM databases - and focusing on publishing its data over the WWW. A new business model was set up - all web resources are now published in an extra bibliography series and the bibliographic data are freely available. Step by step the prices of the other bibliographic data will be also reduced. In the second stage of the project, the focus is on value-added services based on the National Library's catalogue. The main purpose is to introduce alerting services based on the user's search criteria offering different access methods such as RSS feeds, integration with e. g. Zotero, or export of the bibliographic data as a CSV or PDF file. Current standards of cataloguing remain a guide line to offer high-value end-user retrieval but they will be supplemented by automated indexing procedures to find & browse the growing number of documents. A transparent cataloguing policy and wellarranged selection menus are aimed.
    Content
    Vortrag im Rahmen der Session 93. Cataloguing der WORLD LIBRARY AND INFORMATION CONGRESS: 76TH IFLA GENERAL CONFERENCE AND ASSEMBLY, 10-15 August 2010, Gothenburg, Sweden - 91. Bibliography.
    Source
    http://www.ifla.org/files/hq/papers/ifla76/91-svensson-en.pdf
  4. Scientometrics pioneer Eugene Garfield dies : Eugene Garfield, founder of the Institute for Scientific Information and The Scientist, has passed away at age 91 (2017) 0.05
    0.052445572 = product of:
      0.08740928 = sum of:
        0.004767807 = weight(_text_:a in 3460) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.004767807 = score(doc=3460,freq=8.0), product of:
            0.053464882 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046368346 = queryNorm
            0.089176424 = fieldWeight in 3460, product of:
              2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
                8.0 = termFreq=8.0
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.02734375 = fieldNorm(doc=3460)
        0.078734234 = weight(_text_:91 in 3460) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.078734234 = score(doc=3460,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.25837386 = queryWeight, product of:
              5.5722036 = idf(docFreq=456, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046368346 = queryNorm
            0.30472988 = fieldWeight in 3460, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              5.5722036 = idf(docFreq=456, maxDocs=44218)
              0.02734375 = fieldNorm(doc=3460)
        0.003907243 = product of:
          0.007814486 = sum of:
            0.007814486 = weight(_text_:information in 3460) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.007814486 = score(doc=3460,freq=4.0), product of:
                0.08139861 = queryWeight, product of:
                  1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.046368346 = queryNorm
                0.0960027 = fieldWeight in 3460, product of:
                  2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                    4.0 = termFreq=4.0
                  1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.02734375 = fieldNorm(doc=3460)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.6 = coord(3/5)
    
    Content
    Vgl. auch Open Password, Nr.167 vom 01.03.2017 :"Eugene Garfield, Begründer und Pionier der Zitationsindexierung und der Ziationsanalyse, ohne den die Informationswissenschaft heute anders aussähe, ist im Alter von 91 Jahren gestorben. Er hinterlässt Frau, drei Söhne, eine Tochter, eine Stieftochter, zwei Enkeltöchter und zwei Großelternkinder. Garfield machte seinen ersten Abschluss als Bachelor in Chemie an der Columbia University in New York City im Jahre 1949. 1954 sattelte er einen Abschluss in Bibliothekswissenschaft drauf. 1961 sollte er im Fach strukturelle Linguistik promovieren. Als Chemie-Student war er nach eigenen Angaben weder besonders gut noch besonders glücklich. Sein "Erweckungserlebnis" hatte er auf einer Tagung der American Chemical Society, als er entdeckte, dass sich mit der Suche nach Literatur womöglich ein Lebensunterhalt bestreiten lasse. "So I went to the Chairman of the meeting and said: "How do you get a job in this racket?" Ab 1955 war Garfield zunächst als Berater für pharmazeutische Unternehmen tätig. Dort spezialisierte er sich auf Fachinformationen, indem er Inhalte relevanter Fachzeitschriften erarbeitete. 1955 schlug er in "Science" seine bahnbrechende Idee vor, Zitationen wissenschaftlicher Veröffentlichungen systematisch zu erfassen und Zusammenhänge zwischen Zitaten deutlich zu machen. 1960 gründete Garfield das Institute für Scientific Informationen, dessen CEO er bis 1992 blieb. 1964 brachte er den Scientific Information Index heraus. Weitere Maßgrößen wie der Social Science Index (ab 1973), der Arts and Humanities Citation Index (ab 1978) und der Journal Citation Index folgten. Diese Verzeichnisse wurden in dem "Web of Science" zusammengefasst und als Datenbank elektronisch zugänglich gemacht. Damit wurde es den Forschern ermöglich, die für sie relevante Literatur "at their fingertips" zu finden und sich in ihr zurechtzufinden. Darüber hinaus wurde es mit Hilfe der Rankings von Garfields Messgrößen möglich, die relative wissenschaftliche Bedeutung wissenschaftlicher Beiträge, Autoren, wissenschaftlicher Einrichtungen, Regionen und Länder zu messen.
    Garfield wandte sich im Zusammenhang mit seinen Messgrößen gegen "Bibliographic Negligence" und "Citation Amnesia", Er schrieb 2002: "There will never be a perfect solution to the problem of acknowledging intellectual debts. But a beginning can be made if journal editors will demand a signed pledge from authors that they have searched Medline, Science Citation Index, or other appropriate print and electronic databases." Er warnte aber auch vor einen unsachgemäßen Umgang mit seinen Messgößen und vor übertriebenen Erwartungen an sie in Zusammenhang mit Karriereentscheidungen über Wissenschaftler und Überlebensentscheidungen für wissenschaftliche Einrichtungen. 1982 übernahm die Thomson Corporation ISI für 210 Millionen Dollar. In der heutigen Nachfolgeorganisation Clarivate Analytics sind mehr als 4000 Mitarbeitern in über hundert Ländern beschäftigt. Garfield gründete auch eine Zeitung für Wissenschaftler, speziell für Biowissenschaftler, "The Scientist", die weiterbesteht und als kostenfreier Pushdienst bezogen werden kann. In seinen Beiträgen zur Wissenschaftspolitik kritisierte er beispielsweise die Wissenschaftsberater von Präsident Reagen 1986 als "Advocats of the administration´s science policies, rather than as objective conduits for communication between the president and the science community." Seinen Beitrag, mit dem er darum warb, die Förderung von UNESCO-Forschungsprogrammen fortzusetzen, gab er den Titel: "Let´s stand up für Global Science". Das ist auch in Trump-Zeiten ein guter Titel, da die US-Regierung den Wahrheitsbegriff, auf der Wissenschaft basiert, als bedeutungslos verwirft und sich auf Nationalismus und Abschottung statt auf internationale Kommunikation, Kooperation und gemeinsame Ausschöpfung von Interessen fokussiert."
  5. Van der Veer Martens, B.: Do citation systems represent theories of truth? (2001) 0.04
    0.04457741 = product of:
      0.11144352 = sum of:
        0.0068111527 = weight(_text_:a in 3925) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.0068111527 = score(doc=3925,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.053464882 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046368346 = queryNorm
            0.12739488 = fieldWeight in 3925, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=3925)
        0.10463237 = sum of:
          0.015787644 = weight(_text_:information in 3925) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
            0.015787644 = score(doc=3925,freq=2.0), product of:
              0.08139861 = queryWeight, product of:
                1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
                0.046368346 = queryNorm
              0.19395474 = fieldWeight in 3925, product of:
                1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                  2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
                0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=3925)
          0.088844724 = weight(_text_:22 in 3925) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
            0.088844724 = score(doc=3925,freq=4.0), product of:
              0.16237405 = queryWeight, product of:
                3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                0.046368346 = queryNorm
              0.54716086 = fieldWeight in 3925, product of:
                2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                  4.0 = termFreq=4.0
                3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=3925)
      0.4 = coord(2/5)
    
    Date
    22. 7.2006 15:22:28
    Source
    Information Research. 6(2001), no.2
    Type
    a
  6. Qin, J.; Paling, S.: Converting a controlled vocabulary into an ontology : the case of GEM (2001) 0.04
    0.042356532 = product of:
      0.10589133 = sum of:
        0.01155891 = weight(_text_:a in 3895) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.01155891 = score(doc=3895,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.053464882 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046368346 = queryNorm
            0.2161963 = fieldWeight in 3895, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=3895)
        0.09433242 = sum of:
          0.018945174 = weight(_text_:information in 3895) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
            0.018945174 = score(doc=3895,freq=2.0), product of:
              0.08139861 = queryWeight, product of:
                1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
                0.046368346 = queryNorm
              0.23274569 = fieldWeight in 3895, 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=3895)
          0.07538725 = weight(_text_:22 in 3895) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
            0.07538725 = score(doc=3895,freq=2.0), product of:
              0.16237405 = queryWeight, product of:
                3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                0.046368346 = queryNorm
              0.46428138 = fieldWeight in 3895, 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=3895)
      0.4 = coord(2/5)
    
    Date
    24. 8.2005 19:20:22
    Source
    Information Research. 6(2001), no.2
    Type
    a
  7. Periodicals Contents Index (1994) 0.03
    0.031813435 = product of:
      0.15906717 = sum of:
        0.15906717 = weight(_text_:91 in 7248) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.15906717 = score(doc=7248,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.25837386 = queryWeight, product of:
              5.5722036 = idf(docFreq=456, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046368346 = queryNorm
            0.6156473 = fieldWeight in 7248, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              5.5722036 = idf(docFreq=456, maxDocs=44218)
              0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=7248)
      0.2 = coord(1/5)
    
    Issue
    Series 1: 1801-1960; Series 2: 1960/61-1990/91.
  8. Understanding metadata (2004) 0.03
    0.029427508 = product of:
      0.07356877 = sum of:
        0.005448922 = weight(_text_:a in 2686) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.005448922 = score(doc=2686,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.053464882 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046368346 = queryNorm
            0.10191591 = fieldWeight in 2686, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=2686)
        0.06811985 = sum of:
          0.017861681 = weight(_text_:information in 2686) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
            0.017861681 = score(doc=2686,freq=4.0), product of:
              0.08139861 = queryWeight, product of:
                1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
                0.046368346 = queryNorm
              0.21943474 = fieldWeight in 2686, 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=2686)
          0.050258167 = weight(_text_:22 in 2686) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
            0.050258167 = score(doc=2686,freq=2.0), product of:
              0.16237405 = queryWeight, product of:
                3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                0.046368346 = queryNorm
              0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 2686, 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=2686)
      0.4 = coord(2/5)
    
    Abstract
    Metadata (structured information about an object or collection of objects) is increasingly important to libraries, archives, and museums. And although librarians are familiar with a number of issues that apply to creating and using metadata (e.g., authority control, controlled vocabularies, etc.), the world of metadata is nonetheless different than library cataloging, with its own set of challenges. Therefore, whether you are new to these concepts or quite experienced with classic cataloging, this short (20 pages) introductory paper on metadata can be helpful
    Date
    10. 9.2004 10:22:40
    Imprint
    Washington, DC : National Information Standards Organization
  9. Haslhofer, B.: Uniform SPARQL access to interlinked (digital library) sources (2007) 0.03
    0.028930439 = product of:
      0.072326094 = sum of:
        0.009437811 = weight(_text_:a in 541) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.009437811 = score(doc=541,freq=6.0), product of:
            0.053464882 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046368346 = queryNorm
            0.17652355 = fieldWeight in 541, 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=541)
        0.06288828 = sum of:
          0.012630116 = weight(_text_:information in 541) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
            0.012630116 = score(doc=541,freq=2.0), product of:
              0.08139861 = queryWeight, product of:
                1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
                0.046368346 = queryNorm
              0.1551638 = fieldWeight in 541, 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=541)
          0.050258167 = weight(_text_:22 in 541) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
            0.050258167 = score(doc=541,freq=2.0), product of:
              0.16237405 = queryWeight, product of:
                3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                0.046368346 = queryNorm
              0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 541, 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=541)
      0.4 = coord(2/5)
    
    Abstract
    In this presentation, we therefore focus on a solution for providing uniform access to Digital Libraries and other online services. In order to enable uniform query access to heterogeneous sources, we must provide metadata interoperability in a way that a query language - in this case SPARQL - can cope with the incompatibility of the metadata in various sources without changing their already existing information models.
    Date
    26.12.2011 13:22:46
  10. Van Dijck, P.: Introduction to XFML (2003) 0.03
    0.02823769 = product of:
      0.07059422 = sum of:
        0.00770594 = weight(_text_:a in 2474) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.00770594 = score(doc=2474,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.053464882 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046368346 = queryNorm
            0.14413087 = fieldWeight in 2474, 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=2474)
        0.06288828 = sum of:
          0.012630116 = weight(_text_:information in 2474) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
            0.012630116 = score(doc=2474,freq=2.0), product of:
              0.08139861 = queryWeight, product of:
                1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
                0.046368346 = queryNorm
              0.1551638 = fieldWeight in 2474, 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=2474)
          0.050258167 = weight(_text_:22 in 2474) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
            0.050258167 = score(doc=2474,freq=2.0), product of:
              0.16237405 = queryWeight, product of:
                3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                0.046368346 = queryNorm
              0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 2474, 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=2474)
      0.4 = coord(2/5)
    
    Abstract
    Van Dijck builds up an example of actual XFML by showing how to organize tourist information about what restaurants in what cities feature which kind of music: <facet id="city">City</facet> and <topic id="ny" facetid="city"><name>New York</name></topic> combine to mean that New York is the name of a city internally represented as "ny". It is written in the usual clear and practical style of articles on xml.com. Highly recommended as an introduction for anyone interested in XFML.
    Source
    http://www.xml.com/lpt/a/2003/01/22/xfml.html
  11. Beppler, F.D.; Fonseca, F.T.; Pacheco, R.C.S.: Hermeneus: an architecture for an ontology-enabled information retrieval (2008) 0.03
    0.026819343 = product of:
      0.067048356 = sum of:
        0.008173384 = weight(_text_:a in 3261) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.008173384 = score(doc=3261,freq=8.0), product of:
            0.053464882 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046368346 = queryNorm
            0.15287387 = fieldWeight in 3261, product of:
              2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
                8.0 = termFreq=8.0
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=3261)
        0.058874972 = sum of:
          0.02118135 = weight(_text_:information in 3261) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
            0.02118135 = score(doc=3261,freq=10.0), product of:
              0.08139861 = queryWeight, product of:
                1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
                0.046368346 = queryNorm
              0.2602176 = fieldWeight in 3261, product of:
                3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
                  10.0 = termFreq=10.0
                1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
                0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=3261)
          0.037693623 = weight(_text_:22 in 3261) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
            0.037693623 = score(doc=3261,freq=2.0), product of:
              0.16237405 = queryWeight, product of:
                3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                0.046368346 = queryNorm
              0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 3261, 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=3261)
      0.4 = coord(2/5)
    
    Abstract
    Ontologies improve IR systems regarding its retrieval and presentation of information, which make the task of finding information more effective, efficient, and interactive. In this paper we argue that ontologies also greatly improve the engineering of such systems. We created a framework that uses ontology to drive the process of engineering an IR system. We developed a prototype that shows how a domain specialist without knowledge in the IR field can build an IR system with interactive components. The resulting system provides support for users not only to find their information needs but also to extend their state of knowledge. This way, our approach to ontology-enabled information retrieval addresses both the engineering aspect described here and also the usability aspect described elsewhere.
    Date
    28.11.2016 12:43:22
    Type
    a
  12. Veltman, K.H.: From Recorded World to Recording Worlds (2007) 0.03
    0.025837306 = product of:
      0.06459326 = sum of:
        0.00891975 = weight(_text_:a in 512) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.00891975 = score(doc=512,freq=28.0), product of:
            0.053464882 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046368346 = queryNorm
            0.16683382 = fieldWeight in 512, product of:
              5.2915025 = tf(freq=28.0), with freq of:
                28.0 = termFreq=28.0
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.02734375 = fieldNorm(doc=512)
        0.05567351 = weight(_text_:91 in 512) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.05567351 = score(doc=512,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.25837386 = queryWeight, product of:
              5.5722036 = idf(docFreq=456, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046368346 = queryNorm
            0.21547656 = fieldWeight in 512, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              5.5722036 = idf(docFreq=456, maxDocs=44218)
              0.02734375 = fieldNorm(doc=512)
      0.4 = coord(2/5)
    
    Abstract
    The range, depths and limits of what we know depend on the media with which we attempt to record our knowledge. This essay begins with a brief review of developments in a) media: stone, manuscripts, books and digital media, to trace how collections of recorded knowledge expanded to 235,000 in 1837 and have expanded to over 100 million unique titles in a single database including over 1 billion individual listings in 2007. The advent of digital media has brought full text scanning and electronic networks, which enable us to consult digital books and images from our office, home or potentially even with our cell phones. These magnificent developments raise a number of concerns and new challenges. An historical survey of major projects that changed the world reveals that they have taken from one to eight centuries. This helps explain why commercial offerings, which offer useful, and even profitable short-term solutions often undermine a long-term vision. New technologies have the potential to transform our approach to knowledge, but require a vision of a systematic new approach to knowledge. This paper outlines four ingredients for such a vision in the European context. First, the scope of European observatories should be expanded to inform memory institutions of latest technological developments. Second, the quest for a European Digital Library should be expanded to include a distributed repository, a digital reference room and a virtual agora, whereby memory institutions will be linked with current research;. Third, there is need for an institute on Knowledge Organization that takes up anew Otlet's vision, and the pioneering efforts of the Mundaneum (Brussels) and the Bridge (Berlin). Fourth, we need to explore requirements for a Universal Digital Library, which works with countries around the world rather than simply imposing on them an external system. Here, the efforts of the proposed European University of Culture could be useful. Ultimately we need new systems, which open research into multiple ways of knowing, multiple "knowledges". In the past, we went to libraries to study the recorded world. In a world where cameras and sensors are omnipresent we have new recording worlds. In future, we may also use these recording worlds to study the riches of libraries.
    Content
    Vgl. Hinweis in: Online-Mitteilungen 2007, Nr.91 [=Mitt. VOEB 60(2007) H.3], S.15: "Auf der Tagung "Herausforderung: Digitale Langzeitarchivierung - Strategien und Praxis europäischer Kooperation" welche vom 20. bis 21. April 2007 in der Deutschen Nationalbibliothek (Frankfurt am Main) stattfand, befassten sich die einzelnen Referentinnen nicht nur mit der Bewahrung des Kulturgutes, sondern u.a. auch mit der "Aufzeichnung der Welten". Wie man diese "Weltaufzeichnung" in Anbetracht der Fülle und stetigen Zunahme an Informationen zukünftig (noch) besser bewältigen kann, thematisierte Kim H. Veltman in seinem Vortrag. Er präsentierte dazu vier äußerst denkwürdige Ansätze: - Schaffung einerzentralen europäischen Instanz, welche die Gedächtnisinstitutionen über die neusten technologischen Entwicklungen informiert - Errichtung eines digitalen Referenzraums und einer virtuellen Agora innerhalb der Europäischen Digitalen Bibliothek - Gründung eines Instituts zur Wissensorganisation - Erforschen der Anforderungen für eine "Universal Digital Library"."
  13. Heflin, J.; Hendler, J.: Semantic interoperability on the Web (2000) 0.03
    0.025825147 = product of:
      0.064562865 = sum of:
        0.009535614 = weight(_text_:a in 759) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.009535614 = score(doc=759,freq=8.0), product of:
            0.053464882 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046368346 = queryNorm
            0.17835285 = fieldWeight in 759, product of:
              2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
                8.0 = termFreq=8.0
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=759)
        0.05502725 = sum of:
          0.011051352 = weight(_text_:information in 759) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
            0.011051352 = score(doc=759,freq=2.0), product of:
              0.08139861 = queryWeight, product of:
                1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
                0.046368346 = queryNorm
              0.13576832 = fieldWeight in 759, 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=759)
          0.043975897 = weight(_text_:22 in 759) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
            0.043975897 = score(doc=759,freq=2.0), product of:
              0.16237405 = queryWeight, product of:
                3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                0.046368346 = queryNorm
              0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 759, product of:
                1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                  2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=759)
      0.4 = coord(2/5)
    
    Abstract
    XML will have a profound impact on the way data is exchanged on the Internet. An important feature of this language is the separation of content from presentation, which makes it easier to select and/or reformat the data. However, due to the likelihood of numerous industry and domain specific DTDs, those who wish to integrate information will still be faced with the problem of semantic interoperability. In this paper we discuss why this problem is not solved by XML, and then discuss why the Resource Description Framework is only a partial solution. We then present the SHOE language, which we feel has many of the features necessary to enable a semantic web, and describe an existing set of tools that make it easy to use the language.
    Date
    11. 5.2013 19:22:18
    Type
    a
  14. Priss, U.: Faceted knowledge representation (1999) 0.03
    0.025825147 = product of:
      0.064562865 = sum of:
        0.009535614 = weight(_text_:a in 2654) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.009535614 = score(doc=2654,freq=8.0), product of:
            0.053464882 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046368346 = queryNorm
            0.17835285 = fieldWeight in 2654, product of:
              2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
                8.0 = termFreq=8.0
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=2654)
        0.05502725 = sum of:
          0.011051352 = weight(_text_:information in 2654) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
            0.011051352 = score(doc=2654,freq=2.0), product of:
              0.08139861 = queryWeight, product of:
                1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
                0.046368346 = queryNorm
              0.13576832 = fieldWeight in 2654, 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=2654)
          0.043975897 = weight(_text_:22 in 2654) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
            0.043975897 = score(doc=2654,freq=2.0), product of:
              0.16237405 = queryWeight, product of:
                3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                0.046368346 = queryNorm
              0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 2654, product of:
                1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                  2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=2654)
      0.4 = coord(2/5)
    
    Abstract
    Faceted Knowledge Representation provides a formalism for implementing knowledge systems. The basic notions of faceted knowledge representation are "unit", "relation", "facet" and "interpretation". Units are atomic elements and can be abstract elements or refer to external objects in an application. Relations are sequences or matrices of 0 and 1's (binary matrices). Facets are relational structures that combine units and relations. Each facet represents an aspect or viewpoint of a knowledge system. Interpretations are mappings that can be used to translate between different representations. This paper introduces the basic notions of faceted knowledge representation. The formalism is applied here to an abstract modeling of a faceted thesaurus as used in information retrieval.
    Date
    22. 1.2016 17:30:31
    Type
    a
  15. Palm, F.: QVIZ : Query and context based visualization of time-spatial cultural dynamics (2007) 0.03
    0.0252955 = product of:
      0.06323875 = sum of:
        0.009138121 = weight(_text_:a in 1289) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.009138121 = score(doc=1289,freq=10.0), product of:
            0.053464882 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046368346 = queryNorm
            0.1709182 = fieldWeight in 1289, product of:
              3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
                10.0 = termFreq=10.0
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1289)
        0.054100625 = sum of:
          0.016407004 = weight(_text_:information in 1289) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
            0.016407004 = score(doc=1289,freq=6.0), product of:
              0.08139861 = queryWeight, product of:
                1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
                0.046368346 = queryNorm
              0.20156369 = fieldWeight in 1289, product of:
                2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
                  6.0 = termFreq=6.0
                1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
                0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1289)
          0.037693623 = weight(_text_:22 in 1289) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
            0.037693623 = score(doc=1289,freq=2.0), product of:
              0.16237405 = queryWeight, product of:
                3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                0.046368346 = queryNorm
              0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 1289, 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=1289)
      0.4 = coord(2/5)
    
    Abstract
    QVIZ will research and create a framework for visualizing and querying archival resources by a time-space interface based on maps and emergent knowledge structures. The framework will also integrate social software, such as wikis, in order to utilize knowledge in existing and new communities of practice. QVIZ will lead to improved information sharing and knowledge creation, easier access to information in a user-adapted context and innovative ways of exploring and visualizing materials over time, between countries and other administrative units. The common European framework for sharing and accessing archival information provided by the QVIZ project will open a considerably larger commercial market based on archival materials as well as a richer understanding of European history.
    Content
    Vortrag anlässlich des Workshops: "Extending the multilingual capacity of The European Library in the EDL project Stockholm, Swedish National Library, 22-23 November 2007".
  16. Gonzalez, L.: What is FRBR? (2005) 0.03
    0.025204621 = product of:
      0.0420077 = sum of:
        0.008615503 = weight(_text_:a in 3401) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.008615503 = score(doc=3401,freq=80.0), product of:
            0.053464882 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046368346 = queryNorm
            0.16114321 = fieldWeight in 3401, product of:
              8.944272 = tf(freq=80.0), with freq of:
                80.0 = termFreq=80.0
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.015625 = fieldNorm(doc=3401)
        0.031813435 = weight(_text_:91 in 3401) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.031813435 = score(doc=3401,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.25837386 = queryWeight, product of:
              5.5722036 = idf(docFreq=456, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046368346 = queryNorm
            0.123129465 = fieldWeight in 3401, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              5.5722036 = idf(docFreq=456, maxDocs=44218)
              0.015625 = fieldNorm(doc=3401)
        0.0015787645 = product of:
          0.003157529 = sum of:
            0.003157529 = weight(_text_:information in 3401) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.003157529 = score(doc=3401,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.08139861 = queryWeight, product of:
                  1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.046368346 = queryNorm
                0.03879095 = fieldWeight in 3401, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.015625 = fieldNorm(doc=3401)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.6 = coord(3/5)
    
    Abstract
    This brief and gentle introduction to some key concepts laid out in the IFLA-produced Functional Requirements for Bibliographic Records paper should be read by any librarian wondering what all the "ferber" fuss is about. Scratch that. It should be read by any librarian period. It's time for us to admit our library catalogs are a mess from a user's perspective, and FRBR can provide at least a partial solution to the problems we face in fixing our systems. Therefore, knowledge of the basic concepts that are already beginning to transform our bibliographic systems should be considered basic, foundational, professional knowledge. So start here, if you must, but then feel free to follow up with the full report.
    Content
    "Catalogers, catalog managers, and others in library technical services have become increasingly interested in, worried over, and excited about FRBR (the acronym for Functional Requirements of Bibliographic Records). Staff outside of the management of the library's bibliographic database may wonder what the fuss is about (FERBER? FURBUR?), assuming that FRBR is just another addition to the stable of acronyms that catalogers bandy about, a mate or sibling to MARC and AACR2. FRBR, however, has the potential to inspire dramatic changes in library catalogs, and those changes will greatly impact how reference and resource sharing staff and patrons use this core tool. FRBR is a conceptual model for how bibliographic databases might be structured, considering what functions bibliographic records should fulfill in an era when card catalogs are databases with unique possibilities. In some ways FRBR clarifies certain cataloging practices that librarians have been using for over 160 years, since Sir Anthony Panizzi, Keeper of the Printed Books at the British Museum, introduced a set of 91 rules to catalog the print collections of the museum. Sir Anthony believed that patrons should be able to find a particular work by looking in the catalog, that all of an author's works should be retrievable, and that all editions of a work should be assembled together. In other ways, FRBR extends upon past practice to take advantage fully of the capabilities of digital technology to associate bibliographic records in ways a card catalog cannot. FRBR was prepared by a study group assembled by IFLA (International Federation of Library Associations and Institutions) that included staff of the Library of Congress (LC). The final report of the group, "Functional Requirements for Bibliographic Records," is available online. The group began by asking how an online library catalog might better meet users' needs to find, identify, select, and obtain the resources they want.
    Better navigation FRBR is a way of explaining the bibliographic world, in a library context, to allow for a better arrangement and collocation of records in a bibliographic database and, consequently, better navigation. FRBR could make possible a catalog that would group all the bibliographic records for all the filmed versions of Romeo and Juliet in sets organized by the language of the production, for example. Within each language's set would be separate subsets for those on DVD and those on videocassette. This would eliminate the screen after screen of displays of bibliographic headings, each of which a user has to investigate to determine if the record is really for the resource he or she needs ("Where's the movie version on DVD?") The larger the size of the database, the more such organization promises cleaner, more navigable displays to searchers. This is why FRBR is especially important in resource sharing environments-where databases seem to grow exponentially. From items to works One of the bases for that organization is FRBR's conception of bibliographic resources, which fall into four "entities": item, manifestation, expression, and work. An "item" is familiar to us: the object that sits on a shelf, which gets checked out, damaged, repaired, then eventually discarded. In the current era, it may not be physical but instead virtual, like an ebook. The "item," an individual copy, is a single example of a "manifestation," the publication by a certain publisher of a text, or of a sound or video recording. Seamus Heaney's translation of Beowulf, published in hardback by Farrar, Straus and Giroux in 1999, is one manifestation. Heaney's translation of Beowulf published in paperback by W.W. Norton in 2000 is another. Heaney's Beowulf as it appears in the collection Wizards: Stories of Magic, Mischief and Mayhem (Thunder's Mouth, 2001) is yet another manifestation. Manifestations are generally what catalogers catalog. All of these are manifestations of an "expression," a more abstract and intangible entity. Heaney's translation of Beowulf, independent of who is publishing it and when, is one "expression" of that work. The translation by Barry Tharaud is another.
    What are these two Beowulf translations "expressions" of? I used the term work above, an even more abstract concept in the FRBR model. In this case, the "work" is Beowulf , that ancient intellectual creation or effort that over time has been expressed in multiple ways, each manifested in several different ways itself, with one or more items in each manifestation. This is a pretty gross oversimplification of FRBR, which also details other relationships: among these entities; between these entities and various persons (such as creators, publishers, and owners); and between these entities and their subjects. It also specifies characteristics, or "attributes," of the different types of entities (such as title, physical media, date, availability, and more.). But it should be enough to grasp the possibilities. Now apply it Imagine that you have a patron who needs a copy of Heaney's translation of Beowulf . She doesn't care who published it or when, only that it's Heaney's translation. What if you (or your patron) could place an interlibrary loan call on that expression, instead of looking through multiple bibliographic records (as of March, OCLC's WorldCat had nine regular print editions) for multiple manifestations and then judging which record is the best bet on which to place a request? Combine that with functionality that lets you specify "not Braille, not large print," and it could save you time. Now imagine a patron in want of a copy, any copy, in English, of Romeo and Juliet. Saving staff time means saving money. Whether or not this actually happens depends upon what the library community decides to do with FRBR. It is not a set of cataloging rules or a system design, but it can influence both. Several library system vendors are working with FRBR ideas; VTLS's current integrated library system product Virtua incorporates FRBR concepts in its design. More vendors may follow. How the Joint Steering Committee for Revision of Anglo-American Cataloging Rules develops the Anglo-American Cataloging Rules (AACR) to incorporate FRBR will necessarily be a strong determinant of how records work in a "FRBR-ized" bibliographic database.
    National FRBR experiments The larger the bibliographic database, the greater the effect of "FRBR-like" design in reducing the appearance of duplicate records. LC, RLG, and OCLC, all influenced by FRBR, are experimenting with the redesign of their databases. LC's Network Development and MARC Standards Office has posted at its web site the results of some of its investigations into FRBR and MARC, including possible display options for bibliographic information. The design of RLG's public catalog, RedLightGreen, has been described as "FRBR-ish" by Merrilee Proffitt, RLG's program officer. If you try a search for a prolific author or much-published title in RedLightGreen, you'll probably find that the display of search results is much different than what you would expect. OCLC Research has developed a prototype "frbrized" database for fiction, OCLC FictionFinder. Try a title search for a classic title like Romeo and Juliet and observe that OCLC includes, in the initial display of results (described as "works"), a graphic indicator (stars, ranging from one to five). These show in rough terms how many libraries own the work-Romeo and Juliet clearly gets a five. Indicators like this are something resource sharing staff can consider an "ILL quality rating." If you're intrigued by FRBR's possibilities and what they could mean to resource sharing workflow, start talking. Now is the time to connect with colleagues, your local and/or consortial system vendor, RLG, OCLC, and your professional organizations. Have input into how systems develop in the FRBR world."
  17. Bittner, T.; Donnelly, M.; Winter, S.: Ontology and semantic interoperability (2006) 0.02
    0.024290197 = product of:
      0.06072549 = sum of:
        0.004086692 = weight(_text_:a in 4820) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.004086692 = score(doc=4820,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.053464882 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046368346 = queryNorm
            0.07643694 = fieldWeight in 4820, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4820)
        0.0566388 = sum of:
          0.018945174 = weight(_text_:information in 4820) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
            0.018945174 = score(doc=4820,freq=8.0), product of:
              0.08139861 = queryWeight, product of:
                1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
                0.046368346 = queryNorm
              0.23274569 = fieldWeight in 4820, product of:
                2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
                  8.0 = termFreq=8.0
                1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
                0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4820)
          0.037693623 = weight(_text_:22 in 4820) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
            0.037693623 = score(doc=4820,freq=2.0), product of:
              0.16237405 = queryWeight, product of:
                3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                0.046368346 = queryNorm
              0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 4820, 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=4820)
      0.4 = coord(2/5)
    
    Abstract
    One of the major problems facing systems for Computer Aided Design (CAD), Architecture Engineering and Construction (AEC) and Geographic Information Systems (GIS) applications today is the lack of interoperability among the various systems. When integrating software applications, substantial di culties can arise in translating information from one application to the other. In this paper, we focus on semantic di culties that arise in software integration. Applications may use di erent terminologies to describe the same domain. Even when appli-cations use the same terminology, they often associate di erent semantics with the terms. This obstructs information exchange among applications. To cir-cumvent this obstacle, we need some way of explicitly specifying the semantics for each terminology in an unambiguous fashion. Ontologies can provide such specification. It will be the task of this paper to explain what ontologies are and how they can be used to facilitate interoperability between software systems used in computer aided design, architecture engineering and construction, and geographic information processing.
    Date
    3.12.2016 18:39:22
    Type
    a
  18. Priss, U.: Description logic and faceted knowledge representation (1999) 0.02
    0.024035787 = product of:
      0.060089465 = sum of:
        0.012923255 = weight(_text_:a in 2655) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.012923255 = score(doc=2655,freq=20.0), product of:
            0.053464882 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046368346 = queryNorm
            0.24171482 = fieldWeight in 2655, product of:
              4.472136 = tf(freq=20.0), with freq of:
                20.0 = termFreq=20.0
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2655)
        0.04716621 = sum of:
          0.009472587 = weight(_text_:information in 2655) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
            0.009472587 = score(doc=2655,freq=2.0), product of:
              0.08139861 = queryWeight, product of:
                1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
                0.046368346 = queryNorm
              0.116372846 = fieldWeight in 2655, 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=2655)
          0.037693623 = weight(_text_:22 in 2655) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
            0.037693623 = score(doc=2655,freq=2.0), product of:
              0.16237405 = queryWeight, product of:
                3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                0.046368346 = queryNorm
              0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 2655, 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=2655)
      0.4 = coord(2/5)
    
    Abstract
    The term "facet" was introduced into the field of library classification systems by Ranganathan in the 1930's [Ranganathan, 1962]. A facet is a viewpoint or aspect. In contrast to traditional classification systems, faceted systems are modular in that a domain is analyzed in terms of baseline facets which are then synthesized. In this paper, the term "facet" is used in a broader meaning. Facets can describe different aspects on the same level of abstraction or the same aspect on different levels of abstraction. The notion of facets is related to database views, multicontexts and conceptual scaling in formal concept analysis [Ganter and Wille, 1999], polymorphism in object-oriented design, aspect-oriented programming, views and contexts in description logic and semantic networks. This paper presents a definition of facets in terms of faceted knowledge representation that incorporates the traditional narrower notion of facets and potentially facilitates translation between different knowledge representation formalisms. A goal of this approach is a modular, machine-aided knowledge base design mechanism. A possible application is faceted thesaurus construction for information retrieval and data mining. Reasoning complexity depends on the size of the modules (facets). A more general analysis of complexity will be left for future research.
    Date
    22. 1.2016 17:30:31
    Type
    a
  19. Dunning, A.: Do we still need search engines? (1999) 0.02
    0.022984518 = product of:
      0.05746129 = sum of:
        0.013485395 = weight(_text_:a in 6021) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.013485395 = score(doc=6021,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.053464882 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046368346 = queryNorm
            0.25222903 = fieldWeight in 6021, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=6021)
        0.043975897 = product of:
          0.087951794 = sum of:
            0.087951794 = weight(_text_:22 in 6021) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.087951794 = score(doc=6021,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.16237405 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.046368346 = queryNorm
                0.5416616 = fieldWeight in 6021, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=6021)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.4 = coord(2/5)
    
    Source
    Ariadne. 1999, no.22
    Type
    a
  20. Panzer, M.: Designing identifiers for the DDC (2007) 0.02
    0.022406869 = product of:
      0.05601717 = sum of:
        0.009138121 = weight(_text_:a in 1752) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.009138121 = score(doc=1752,freq=40.0), product of:
            0.053464882 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046368346 = queryNorm
            0.1709182 = fieldWeight in 1752, product of:
              6.3245554 = tf(freq=40.0), with freq of:
                40.0 = termFreq=40.0
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0234375 = fieldNorm(doc=1752)
        0.04687905 = sum of:
          0.0047362936 = weight(_text_:information in 1752) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
            0.0047362936 = score(doc=1752,freq=2.0), product of:
              0.08139861 = queryWeight, product of:
                1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
                0.046368346 = queryNorm
              0.058186423 = fieldWeight in 1752, product of:
                1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                  2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
                0.0234375 = fieldNorm(doc=1752)
          0.042142756 = weight(_text_:22 in 1752) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
            0.042142756 = score(doc=1752,freq=10.0), product of:
              0.16237405 = queryWeight, product of:
                3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                0.046368346 = queryNorm
              0.2595412 = fieldWeight in 1752, product of:
                3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
                  10.0 = termFreq=10.0
                3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                0.0234375 = fieldNorm(doc=1752)
      0.4 = coord(2/5)
    
    Content
    "Although the Dewey Decimal Classification is currently available on the web to subscribers as WebDewey and Abridged WebDewey in the OCLC Connexion service and in an XML version to licensees, OCLC does not provide any "web services" based on the DDC. By web services, we mean presentation of the DDC to other machines (not humans) for uses such as searching, browsing, classifying, mapping, harvesting, and alerting. In order to build web-accessible services based on the DDC, several elements have to be considered. One of these elements is the design of an appropriate Uniform Resource Identifier (URI) structure for Dewey. The design goals of mapping the entity model of the DDC into an identifier space can be summarized as follows: * Common locator for Dewey concepts and associated resources for use in web services and web applications * Use-case-driven, but not directly related to and outlasting a specific use case (persistency) * Retraceable path to a concept rather than an abstract identification, reusing a means of identification that is already present in the DDC and available in existing metadata. We have been working closely with our colleagues in the OCLC Office of Research (especially Andy Houghton as well as Eric Childress, Diane Vizine-Goetz, and Stu Weibel) on a preliminary identifier syntax. The basic identifier format we are currently exploring is: http://dewey.info/{aspect}/{object}/{locale}/{type}/{version}/{resource} where * {aspect} is the aspect associated with an {object}-the current value set of aspect contains "concept", "scheme", and "index"; additional ones are under exploration * {object} is a type of {aspect} * {locale} identifies a Dewey translation * {type} identifies a Dewey edition type and contains, at a minimum, the values "edn" for the full edition or "abr" for the abridged edition * {version} identifies a Dewey edition version * {resource} identifies a resource associated with an {object} in the context of {locale}, {type}, and {version}
    Some examples of identifiers for concepts follow: <http://dewey.info/concept/338.4/en/edn/22/> This identifier is used to retrieve or identify the 338.4 concept in the English-language version of Edition 22. <http://dewey.info/concept/338.4/de/edn/22/> This identifier is used to retrieve or identify the 338.4 concept in the German-language version of Edition 22. <http://dewey.info/concept/333.7-333.9/> This identifier is used to retrieve or identify the 333.7-333.9 concept across all editions and language versions. <http://dewey.info/concept/333.7-333.9/about.skos> This identifier is used to retrieve a SKOS representation of the 333.7-333.9 concept (using the "resource" element). There are several open issues at this preliminary stage of development: Use cases: URIs need to represent the range of statements or questions that could be submitted to a Dewey web service. Therefore, it seems that some general questions have to be answered first: What information does an agent have when coming to a Dewey web service? What kind of questions will such an agent ask? Placement of the {locale} component: It is still an open question if the {locale} component should be placed after the {version} component instead (<http://dewey.info/concept/338.4/edn/22/en>) to emphasize that the most important instantiation of a Dewey class is its edition, not its language version. From a services point of view, however, it could make more sense to keep the current arrangement, because users are more likely to come to the service with a present understanding of the language version they are seeking without knowing the specifics of a certain edition in which they are trying to find topics. Identification of other Dewey entities: The goal is to create a locator that does not answer all, but a lot of questions that could be asked about the DDC. Which entities are missing but should be surfaced for services or user agents? How will those services or agents interact with them? Should some entities be rendered in a different way as presented? For example, (how) should the DDC Summaries be retrievable? Would it be necessary to make the DDC Manual accessible through this identifier structure?"

Types

  • a 476
  • n 19
  • s 17
  • p 16
  • r 15
  • x 10
  • i 9
  • m 8
  • b 4
  • More… Less…

Themes

Classifications