Search (706 results, page 1 of 36)

0.101439916 = sum of:
  0.08076982 = product of:
    0.24230945 = sum of:
      0.24230945 = weight(_text_:3a in 562) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.24230945 = score(doc=562,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.43114176 = queryWeight, product of:
            8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
            0.050854117 = queryNorm
          0.56201804 = fieldWeight in 562, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
            0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=562)
    0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.020670092 = product of:
    0.041340183 = sum of:
      0.041340183 = weight(_text_:22 in 562) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.041340183 = score(doc=562,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.17808245 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.050854117 = queryNorm
          0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 562, 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=562)
    0.5 = coord(1/2)

Content

Vgl.: http://www.google.de/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=1&cad=rja&ved=0CEAQFjAA&url=http%3A%2F%2Fciteseerx.ist.psu.edu%2Fviewdoc%2Fdownload%3Fdoi%3D10.1.1.91.4940%26rep%3Drep1%26type%3Dpdf&ei=dOXrUMeIDYHDtQahsIGACg&usg=AFQjCNHFWVh6gNPvnOrOS9R3rkrXCNVD-A&sig2=5I2F5evRfMnsttSgFF9g7Q&bvm=bv.1357316858,d.Yms.

Date

8. 1.2013 10:22:32

0.06938817 = product of:
  0.13877635 = sum of:
    0.13877635 = sum of:
      0.09743616 = weight(_text_:90 in 2205) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.09743616 = score(doc=2205,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.2733978 = queryWeight, product of:
            5.376119 = idf(docFreq=555, maxDocs=44218)
            0.050854117 = queryNorm
          0.3563897 = fieldWeight in 2205, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            5.376119 = idf(docFreq=555, maxDocs=44218)
            0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2205)
      0.041340183 = weight(_text_:22 in 2205) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.041340183 = score(doc=2205,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.17808245 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.050854117 = queryNorm
          0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 2205, 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=2205)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

Form subdivisions have always been an important part of the Library of Congress Subject Headings. However, when the MARC format was developed, no separate subfield code to identify form subdivisions was defined. Form and topical subdivisions were both included within a general subdivision category. In 1995, the USMARC Advisory Group approved a proposal defining subfield v for form subdivisions, and in 1999 the Library of Congress (LC) began identifying form subdivisions with the new code. However, there are millions of older bibliographic records lacking the explicit form subdivision coding. Identifying form subdivisions retrospectively is not a simple task. An algorithmic method was developed to identify form subdivisions coded as general subdivisions. The algorithm was used to identify 2,563 unique form subdivisions or combinations of form subdivisions in OCLC's WorldCat. The algorithm proved to be highly accurate with an error rate estimated to be less than 0.1%. The observed usage of the form subdivisions was highly skewed with the 100 most used form subdivisions or combinations of subdivisions accounting for 90% of the assignments.

Date

10. 9.2000 17:38:22

0.06495745 = product of:
  0.1299149 = sum of:
    0.1299149 = product of:
      0.2598298 = sum of:
        0.2598298 = weight(_text_:90 in 555) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.2598298 = score(doc=555,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.2733978 = queryWeight, product of:
              5.376119 = idf(docFreq=555, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050854117 = queryNorm
            0.9503726 = fieldWeight in 555, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              5.376119 = idf(docFreq=555, maxDocs=44218)
              0.125 = fieldNorm(doc=555)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Source

OCLC systems and services. 16(2000) no.2, S.84-90

0.06495745 = product of:
  0.1299149 = sum of:
    0.1299149 = product of:
      0.2598298 = sum of:
        0.2598298 = weight(_text_:90 in 4881) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.2598298 = score(doc=4881,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.2733978 = queryWeight, product of:
              5.376119 = idf(docFreq=555, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050854117 = queryNorm
            0.9503726 = fieldWeight in 4881, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              5.376119 = idf(docFreq=555, maxDocs=44218)
              0.125 = fieldNorm(doc=4881)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Source

Online information review. 24(2000) no.1, S.90-93

0.05782348 = product of:
  0.11564696 = sum of:
    0.11564696 = sum of:
      0.08119681 = weight(_text_:90 in 162) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.08119681 = score(doc=162,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.2733978 = queryWeight, product of:
            5.376119 = idf(docFreq=555, maxDocs=44218)
            0.050854117 = queryNorm
          0.29699144 = fieldWeight in 162, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            5.376119 = idf(docFreq=555, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=162)
      0.034450155 = weight(_text_:22 in 162) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.034450155 = score(doc=162,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.17808245 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.050854117 = queryNorm
          0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 162, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=162)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

More and more libraries are providing access to Web resources through OCLC's (Online Computer Resource Center) Cooperative Online Resource Catalog (CORC) and, by extension, OCLC's WorldCat database. The ability to use a database to its maximum potential depends upon understanding what a database contains and the guidelines for its construction. This study examines the characteristics of Web resources in CORC in terms of their subject matter, the source of the content, publication patterns, and the units of information chosen for representation in the database. The majority of the 414 resources in the sample belonged to the social sciences. Academic libraries and government agencies contributed more than 90% of the records for resources in the sample. Using the Anglo-American Cataloguing Rules, 2d edition (AACR2) definitions for publication patterns that are part of the upcoming 2002 amendments reveals that nearly half of the sample fell into the category of integrating resources. Identifying units of representation of the resources described was more difficult. Existing definitions for Web units in development are not adequate to describe all of the resources in the sample. In addition, there is wide variability in the units of representation chosen for inclusion by the libraries contributing records, resulting in little predictability in what units of information might be found in the database.

Date

10. 9.2000 17:38:22

0.05782348 = product of:
  0.11564696 = sum of:
    0.11564696 = sum of:
      0.08119681 = weight(_text_:90 in 56) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.08119681 = score(doc=56,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.2733978 = queryWeight, product of:
            5.376119 = idf(docFreq=555, maxDocs=44218)
            0.050854117 = queryNorm
          0.29699144 = fieldWeight in 56, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            5.376119 = idf(docFreq=555, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=56)
      0.034450155 = weight(_text_:22 in 56) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.034450155 = score(doc=56,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.17808245 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.050854117 = queryNorm
          0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 56, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=56)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

The study reported here investigated the query expansion behavior of end-users interacting with a thesaurus-enhanced search system on the Web. Two groups, namely academic staff and postgraduate students, were recruited into this study. Data were collected from 90 searches performed by 30 users using the OVID interface to the CAB abstracts database. Data-gathering techniques included questionnaires, screen capturing software, and interviews. The results presented here relate to issues of search-topic and search-term characteristics, number and types of expanded queries, usefulness of thesaurus terms, and behavioral differences between academic staff and postgraduate students in their interaction. The key conclusions drawn were that (a) academic staff chose more narrow and synonymous terms than did postgraduate students, who generally selected broader and related terms; (b) topic complexity affected users' interaction with the thesaurus in that complex topics required more query expansion and search term selection; (c) users' prior topic-search experience appeared to have a significant effect on their selection and evaluation of thesaurus terms; (d) in 50% of the searches where additional terms were suggested from the thesaurus, users stated that they had not been aware of the terms at the beginning of the search; this observation was particularly noticeable in the case of postgraduate students.

Date

22. 7.2006 16:32:43

0.05782348 = product of:
  0.11564696 = sum of:
    0.11564696 = sum of:
      0.08119681 = weight(_text_:90 in 3611) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.08119681 = score(doc=3611,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.2733978 = queryWeight, product of:
            5.376119 = idf(docFreq=555, maxDocs=44218)
            0.050854117 = queryNorm
          0.29699144 = fieldWeight in 3611, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            5.376119 = idf(docFreq=555, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3611)
      0.034450155 = weight(_text_:22 in 3611) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.034450155 = score(doc=3611,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.17808245 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.050854117 = queryNorm
          0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 3611, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3611)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Content

Bezug zu: Svenonius, E.: Precoordination or not?. In: Subject indexing: principles and practices in the 90's. Proceedings of the IFLA Satellite Meeting Held in Lisbon, Portugal, 17-18 August 1993, and sponsored by the IFLA Section on Classification and Indexing and the Instituto da Biblioteca Nacional e do Livro, Lisbon, Portugal. Ed.: R.P. Holley et al. München: Saur 1995. S.231-255.

Date

20. 6.2010 14:22:43

0.04871808 = product of:
  0.09743616 = sum of:
    0.09743616 = product of:
      0.19487232 = sum of:
        0.19487232 = weight(_text_:90 in 250) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.19487232 = score(doc=250,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.2733978 = queryWeight, product of:
              5.376119 = idf(docFreq=555, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050854117 = queryNorm
            0.7127794 = fieldWeight in 250, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              5.376119 = idf(docFreq=555, maxDocs=44218)
              0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=250)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Source

International cataloguing and bibliographic control. 36(2007) no.4, S.90-92

0.04711573 = product of:
  0.09423146 = sum of:
    0.09423146 = product of:
      0.28269437 = sum of:
        0.28269437 = weight(_text_:3a in 306) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.28269437 = score(doc=306,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.43114176 = queryWeight, product of:
              8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050854117 = queryNorm
            0.65568775 = fieldWeight in 306, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=306)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Content

Vgl.: http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/xpl/login.jsp?tp=&arnumber=5386707&url=http%3A%2F%2Fieeexplore.ieee.org%2Fxpls%2Fabs_all.jsp%3Farnumber%3D5386707.

0.046258785 = product of:
  0.09251757 = sum of:
    0.09251757 = sum of:
      0.06495745 = weight(_text_:90 in 2758) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.06495745 = score(doc=2758,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.2733978 = queryWeight, product of:
            5.376119 = idf(docFreq=555, maxDocs=44218)
            0.050854117 = queryNorm
          0.23759314 = fieldWeight in 2758, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            5.376119 = idf(docFreq=555, maxDocs=44218)
            0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=2758)
      0.027560122 = weight(_text_:22 in 2758) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.027560122 = score(doc=2758,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.17808245 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.050854117 = queryNorm
          0.15476047 = fieldWeight in 2758, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=2758)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

The representation of information contents by graphical maps is an extended ongoing research topic. In this paper we introduce the application of UDC codes for the subject maps development. We use the following graphic representation methodologies: 1) Multidimensional scaling (MDS), 2) Cluster analysis, 3) Neural networks (Self Organizing Map - SOM). Finally, we conclude about the application viability of every kind of map. 1. Introduction Advanced techniques for Information Retrieval (IR) currently make up one of the most active areas for research in the field of library and information science. New models representing document content are replacing the classic systems in which the search terms supplied by the user were compared against the indexing terms existing in the inverted files of a database. One of the topics most often studied in the last years is bibliographic browsing, a good complement to querying strategies. Since the 80's, many authors have treated this topic. For example, Ellis establishes that browsing is based an three different types of tasks: identification, familiarization and differentiation (Ellis, 1989). On the other hand, Cove indicates three different browsing types: searching browsing, general purpose browsing and serendipity browsing (Cove, 1988). Marcia Bates presents six different types (Bates, 1989), although the classification of Bawden is the one that really interests us: 1) similarity comparison, 2) structure driven, 3) global vision (Bawden, 1993). The global vision browsing implies the use of graphic representations, which we will call map displays, that allow the user to get a global idea of the nature and structure of the information in the database. In the 90's, several authors worked an this research line, developing different types of maps. One of the most active was Xia Lin what introduced the concept of Graphical Table of Contents (GTOC), comparing the maps to true table of contents based an graphic representations (Lin 1996). Lin applies the algorithm SOM to his own personal bibliography, analyzed in function of the words of the title and abstract fields, and represented in a two-dimensional map (Lin 1997). Later on, Lin applied this type of maps to create websites GTOCs, through a Java application.

Date

12. 9.2004 14:31:22

0.04038491 = product of:
  0.08076982 = sum of:
    0.08076982 = product of:
      0.24230945 = sum of:
        0.24230945 = weight(_text_:3a in 2918) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.24230945 = score(doc=2918,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.43114176 = queryWeight, product of:
              8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050854117 = queryNorm
            0.56201804 = fieldWeight in 2918, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2918)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Footnote

Vgl.: http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/Xplore/login.jsp?reload=true&url=http%3A%2F%2Fieeexplore.ieee.org%2Fiel5%2F4755313%2F4755314%2F04755480.pdf%3Farnumber%3D4755480&authDecision=-203.

0.038975902 = product of:
  0.077951804 = sum of:
    0.077951804 = product of:
      0.15590361 = sum of:
        0.15590361 = weight(_text_:22 in 4109) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.15590361 = score(doc=4109,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.17808245 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050854117 = queryNorm
            0.8754574 = fieldWeight in 4109, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.125 = fieldNorm(doc=4109)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Date

14. 8.2005 14:22:22

0.03580165 = product of:
  0.0716033 = sum of:
    0.0716033 = product of:
      0.1432066 = sum of:
        0.1432066 = weight(_text_:22 in 1339) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.1432066 = score(doc=1339,freq=6.0), product of:
            0.17808245 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050854117 = queryNorm
            0.804159 = fieldWeight in 1339, product of:
              2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
                6.0 = termFreq=6.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=1339)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Date

22. 2.2003 17:25:39
22. 2.2003 18:16:22

0.034448884 = product of:
  0.06889777 = sum of:
    0.06889777 = product of:
      0.13779554 = sum of:
        0.13779554 = weight(_text_:90 in 1998) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.13779554 = score(doc=1998,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.2733978 = queryWeight, product of:
              5.376119 = idf(docFreq=555, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050854117 = queryNorm
            0.50401115 = fieldWeight in 1998, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              5.376119 = idf(docFreq=555, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1998)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

Since millions seek health information online, it is vital for this information to be comprehensible. Most studies use readability formulas, which ignore vocabulary, and conclude that online health information is too difficult. We developed a vocabularly-based, naïve Bayes classifier to distinguish between three difficulty levels in text. It proved 98% accurate in a 250-document evaluation. We compared our classifier with readability formulas for 90 new documents with different origins and asked representative human evaluators, an expert and a consumer, to judge each document. Average readability grade levels for educational and commercial pages was 10th grade or higher, too difficult according to current literature. In contrast, the classifier showed that 70-90% of these pages were written at an intermediate, appropriate level indicating that vocabulary usage is frequently appropriate in text considered too difficult by readability formula evaluations. The expert considered the pages more difficult for a consumer than the consumer did.

0.034103915 = product of:
  0.06820783 = sum of:
    0.06820783 = product of:
      0.13641566 = sum of:
        0.13641566 = weight(_text_:22 in 4189) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.13641566 = score(doc=4189,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.17808245 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050854117 = queryNorm
            0.76602525 = fieldWeight in 4189, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=4189)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Date

22. 7.2006 14:19:22

0.033654094 = product of:
  0.06730819 = sum of:
    0.06730819 = product of:
      0.20192455 = sum of:
        0.20192455 = weight(_text_:3a in 692) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.20192455 = score(doc=692,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.43114176 = queryWeight, product of:
              8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050854117 = queryNorm
            0.46834838 = fieldWeight in 692, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=692)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Content

Vgl.: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/Piaget-%E2%80%99-s-Constructivism-%2C-Papert-%E2%80%99-s-%3A-What-%E2%80%99-s-Ackermann/89cbcc1e740a4591443ff4765a6ae8df0fdf5554. Darunter weitere Hinweise auf verwandte Beiträge. Auch unter: Learning Group Publication 5(2001) no.3, S.438.

0.032478724 = product of:
  0.06495745 = sum of:
    0.06495745 = product of:
      0.1299149 = sum of:
        0.1299149 = weight(_text_:90 in 5601) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.1299149 = score(doc=5601,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.2733978 = queryWeight, product of:
              5.376119 = idf(docFreq=555, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050854117 = queryNorm
            0.4751863 = fieldWeight in 5601, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              5.376119 = idf(docFreq=555, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=5601)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Source

Cataloging and classification quarterly. 29(2000) no.4, S.87-90

0.032478724 = product of:
  0.06495745 = sum of:
    0.06495745 = product of:
      0.1299149 = sum of:
        0.1299149 = weight(_text_:90 in 139) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.1299149 = score(doc=139,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.2733978 = queryWeight, product of:
              5.376119 = idf(docFreq=555, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050854117 = queryNorm
            0.4751863 = fieldWeight in 139, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              5.376119 = idf(docFreq=555, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=139)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Pages

S.90-

0.032478724 = product of:
  0.06495745 = sum of:
    0.06495745 = product of:
      0.1299149 = sum of:
        0.1299149 = weight(_text_:90 in 1997) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.1299149 = score(doc=1997,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.2733978 = queryWeight, product of:
              5.376119 = idf(docFreq=555, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050854117 = queryNorm
            0.4751863 = fieldWeight in 1997, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              5.376119 = idf(docFreq=555, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=1997)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Source

Journal of Internet cataloging. 6(2003) no.2, S.35-90

0.032478724 = product of:
  0.06495745 = sum of:
    0.06495745 = product of:
      0.1299149 = sum of:
        0.1299149 = weight(_text_:90 in 2636) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.1299149 = score(doc=2636,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.2733978 = queryWeight, product of:
              5.376119 = idf(docFreq=555, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050854117 = queryNorm
            0.4751863 = fieldWeight in 2636, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              5.376119 = idf(docFreq=555, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=2636)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Pages

S.85-90