Search (88 results, page 5 of 5)

  • × theme_ss:"Register"
  1. Bradshaw, S.; Hammond, K.: Constructing indices from citations in collections of research papers (1999) 0.00
    0.004011904 = product of:
      0.012035711 = sum of:
        0.012035711 = product of:
          0.03610713 = sum of:
            0.03610713 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 6682) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.03610713 = score(doc=6682,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.15433937 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.051022716 = queryNorm
                0.23394634 = fieldWeight in 6682, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=6682)
          0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    
    Abstract
    We describe Rosetta, an indexing and retrieval system for collections of research papers. Rosetta indexes papers in a collection based on the way they have been described when referenced by other papers in the collection. With this technique, indices for papers describe information provided in the same way a query describes information needed. Using Rosetta, simple natural language queries retrieve high-precision results in which descriptions based on citations clearly summarize retrieved papers; allowing users to quickly determine which papers most closely meet their information needs
  2. Luhn, H.P.: Keyword-in-context index for technical literature (1985) 0.00
    0.004011904 = product of:
      0.012035711 = sum of:
        0.012035711 = product of:
          0.03610713 = sum of:
            0.03610713 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 3638) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.03610713 = score(doc=3638,freq=8.0), product of:
                0.15433937 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.051022716 = queryNorm
                0.23394634 = fieldWeight in 3638, product of:
                  2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
                    8.0 = termFreq=8.0
                  3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.02734375 = fieldNorm(doc=3638)
          0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    
    Abstract
    In the optimistic 1960s the potential of the computer seemed limitless. The realization of this potential in the area of information retrieval and dissemination owes much to the creative mind of Hans Peter Luhn. A pioneer of information science, he had a mind and an imagination that could transcend the state of the art. Luhn was born in Germany, where he studied technology, physics, and accounting. He came to the United States in 1924 and in 1941, at the age of 45, he joined IBM. In the course of his twenty-year tenure at IBM, he was issued over eighty patents; at one time he held more than any other IBM employee. Luhn is credited with originating KWIC indexes, computer selective dissemination systems (SDI), computer coding schemes, and statistical techniques for automatic indexing and abstracting. Also attributed to him is the first modern use of the word "thesaurus." The selection that follows modestly presents the idea of a Keyword in Context (KWIC) index. This is the idea of automatically identifying significant or "key" words and highlighting them in context. The context in question was normally a title. Though title term or catchword indexing had been practiced for over one hundred years, the implementation of the idea in mechanized systems in the 1960s was not trivial. It required programming the computer to recognize word boundaries and then developing a means for automatically differentiating significant from nonsignificant words. Spaces were used to demarcate word boundaries and a stop list, consisting of articles, conjunctions, prepositions, auxiliary verbs, some adjectives, and some very common words, was used to differentiate significant from nonsignificant words. A difficulty with any automatic indexing limited to extracting single words from texts is the semantic indeterminancy of the extracted character strings. To disambiguate these, Luhn adopted the concordance idea, proposing to display them in the context of their titles. Specifying the meaning of an index term by couching it in "context," anticipated the later development of string index languages such as PRECIS (PREserved Context Index System). Although the selection that follows is quite short, it presents, in addition to the idea of KWIC, what at the time were two innovative ideas. One is the distinction between the dissemination and the retrieval of information, in regard to which Luhn makes a point sometimes overlooked by modern critics of KWIC. This is that different purposes require different kinds of indexes; an index that is used to disseminate information for current awareness need not be as "perfect" as one used for retrospective information retrieval. The need to alert researchers to current information quickly, and the somewhat transitory character of this information, make KWIC, albeit quick and dirty, a costeffective alternative for dissemination indexes. The second harbinger idea is a method of uniquely identifying documents for retrieval using an identification code comprising the initial characters from a document's author, title, and - interestingly - year of publication. Luhn's mind was fertile indeed and he is aptly called a pioneer of information science.
  3. Miksa, F.: ¬The DDC Relative Index (2006) 0.00
    0.0038404856 = product of:
      0.011521457 = sum of:
        0.011521457 = product of:
          0.03456437 = sum of:
            0.03456437 = weight(_text_:22 in 5775) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.03456437 = score(doc=5775,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.17867287 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.051022716 = queryNorm
                0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 5775, 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=5775)
          0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    
    Abstract
    The "Relative Index" of the Dewey Decimal Classification (DDC) is investigated over the span of its lifetime in 22 editions of the DDC as to its character as a concept indexing system, its provision of conceptual contexts for the terms it lists, and the way in which the index intersects with special tables of categories used in the system. Striking features of the index that are discussed include how the locater function of an index is expressed in it, its practice of including concepts that have not been given specific notational locations in the system, its two methods of providing conceptual contexts for indexed terms (by means of the notation of the system and by the insertion of enhancement terms that portray conceptual context), and how the index has intersected with three types of special tables of categories in the system. Critical issues raised include the indexing of constructed or synthesized complex concepts, inconsistencies in how enhancement terms are portrayed and the absence of them in some instances, the problem of equating conceptual context with disciplinary context, and problems associated with not indexing one type of special table. Summary and conclusions are extended to problems that arise in studying the index.
  4. Walker, D.: Subject-oriented Web indexing (2000) 0.00
    0.0034615172 = product of:
      0.010384551 = sum of:
        0.010384551 = product of:
          0.031153653 = sum of:
            0.031153653 = weight(_text_:online in 218) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.031153653 = score(doc=218,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.1548489 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.0349014 = idf(docFreq=5778, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.051022716 = queryNorm
                0.20118743 = fieldWeight in 218, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  3.0349014 = idf(docFreq=5778, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=218)
          0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    
    Abstract
    My goal in this short article is to bring you up to speed on Web indexing. I assume you are a person with good word skills and an inquisitive mind. Also, I assume you have good keyboard skills, access to the Internet, and have already created some HTML pages using, say, Netscape Composer. You may need help from your Internet Service Provider (ISP) to upload pages onto your Web site. This article is based on my experience teaching an online interactive course in Web indexing for my company, WWWalker Web Development, in 1998. We develop Web sites, support Linux and Windows NT, write technical articles, and specialize in Web indexing.
  5. Hedden, H.: ¬The accidental taxonomist (2012) 0.00
    0.0032421078 = product of:
      0.009726323 = sum of:
        0.009726323 = product of:
          0.029178968 = sum of:
            0.029178968 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 2915) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.029178968 = score(doc=2915,freq=4.0), product of:
                0.15433937 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.051022716 = queryNorm
                0.18905719 = fieldWeight in 2915, product of:
                  2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                    4.0 = termFreq=4.0
                  3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=2915)
          0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    
    LCSH
    Cross References (Information Retrieval)
    Subject
    Cross References (Information Retrieval)
  6. Maislin, S.: Ripping out the pages (2000) 0.00
    0.0028845975 = product of:
      0.008653793 = sum of:
        0.008653793 = product of:
          0.025961377 = sum of:
            0.025961377 = weight(_text_:online in 220) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.025961377 = score(doc=220,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.1548489 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.0349014 = idf(docFreq=5778, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.051022716 = queryNorm
                0.16765618 = fieldWeight in 220, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  3.0349014 = idf(docFreq=5778, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=220)
          0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    
    Abstract
    When the Web was invented, it was touted as a novel nonlinear medium for the written word. No longer would we be constrained by linear presentations! Hyperlinks would allow us to jump haphazardly from page to page, chapter to chapter, idea to idea! Texts would no longer need to run from beginning to end! This is misleading. A printed book is also multidimensional and potentially nonlinear. We can open it to any page, from any other page, for any reason. We can open several books at once. In fact, what makes a book special is its combination of linear structure (the order of the words) and nonlinear physicality (the bound papers). This linear/nonlinear duality is enhanced further by the index, which maps linearly sequenced pages in a nonlinear, informationally ordered structure (architecture). In truth, the online environment is crippled by an absence of linear structure. Imagine selecting a hard cover book, tearing off the covers, ripping pages into small pieces, and throwing them in a box. That box is like a computer file system, and the paper scraps are Web documents. Only one scrap can be retrieved from the box at a time, and it must be replaced before another can be accessed. Page numbers are meaningless. Global context is destroyed. And without page numbers or context, what happens to the index?
  7. Rowland, M.J.: Web site design for indexers (2000) 0.00
    0.0028845975 = product of:
      0.008653793 = sum of:
        0.008653793 = product of:
          0.025961377 = sum of:
            0.025961377 = weight(_text_:online in 225) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.025961377 = score(doc=225,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.1548489 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.0349014 = idf(docFreq=5778, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.051022716 = queryNorm
                0.16765618 = fieldWeight in 225, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  3.0349014 = idf(docFreq=5778, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=225)
          0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    
    Abstract
    Do indexers really need Web sites? No, they do not. Indexers do not need computers either. Indexes can be done on cards; networking can be done at conferences; and marketing can be done with cold calls. But, just as email has become indispensable to communication, and computers have become essential to indexing, so Web sites have become more and more necessary for all types of businesses, particularly small companies with small advertising budgets, like indexing businesses. The amount of business being conducted on the Web is increasing exponentially. Publishers, packagers, and other potential clients are beginning to search the Web for indexers. Why not participate in e-commerce, the newest way of doing business? A good Web site not only helps you obtain work, it increases your professional reputation and helps you influence the future of indexing. You can use your site as an online resume, to display a list of all the books you have indexed in the past year, to provide examples of your work, and to network with others. You can use it to express your philosophy of indexing, to teach others about indexing, and to make your voice heard on issues affecting the indexing profession. Not all indexers need Web sites, but active, involved, and far-sighted indexers, like you, do!
  8. Software for Indexing (2003) 0.00
    0.002498135 = product of:
      0.007494405 = sum of:
        0.007494405 = product of:
          0.022483215 = sum of:
            0.022483215 = weight(_text_:online in 2294) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.022483215 = score(doc=2294,freq=6.0), product of:
                0.1548489 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.0349014 = idf(docFreq=5778, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.051022716 = queryNorm
                0.14519453 = fieldWeight in 2294, product of:
                  2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
                    6.0 = termFreq=6.0
                  3.0349014 = idf(docFreq=5778, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.01953125 = fieldNorm(doc=2294)
          0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    
    Footnote
    Rez. in: Knowledge organization 30(2003) no.2, S.115-116 (C. Jacobs): "This collection of articles by indexing practitioners, software designers and vendors is divided into five sections: Dedicated Software, Embedded Software, Online and Web Indexing Software, Database and Image Software, and Voice-activated, Automatic, and Machine-aided Software. This diversity is its strength. Part 1 is introduced by two chapters an choosing dedicated software, highlighting the issues involved and providing tips an evaluating requirements. The second chapter includes a fourteen page chart that analyzes the attributes of Authex Plus, three versions of CINDEX 1.5, MACREX 7, two versions of SKY Index (5.1 and 6.0) and wINDEX. The lasting value in this chart is its utility in making the prospective user aware of the various attributes/capabilities that are possible and that should be considered. The following chapters consist of 16 testimonials for these software packages, completed by a final chapter an specialized/customized software. The point is made that if a particular software function could increase your efficiency, it can probably be created. The chapters in Part 2, Embedded Software, go into a great deal more detail about how the programs work, and are less reviews than illustrations of functionality. Perhaps this is because they are not really stand-alones, but are functions within, or add-ons used with larger word processing or publishing programs. The software considered are Microsoft Word, FrameMaker, PageMaker, IndexTension 3.1.5 that is used with QuarkXPress, and Index Tools Professional and IXgen that are used with FrameMaker. The advantages and disadvantages of embedded indexing are made very clear, but the actual illustrations are difficult to follow if one has not worked at all with embedded software. Nonetheless, the section is valuable as it highlights issues and provides pointers an solutions to embedded indexing problems.
    Part 3, Online and Web Indexing Software, opens with a chapter in which the functionalities of HTML/Prep, HTML Indexer, and RoboHELP HTML Edition are compared. The following three chapters look at them individually. This section helps clarify the basic types of non-database web indexing - that used for back-of-the-book style indexes, and that used for online help indexes. The first chapter of Part 4, Database and image software, begins with a good discussion of what database indexing is, but falls to carry through with any listing of general characteristics, problems and attributes that should be considered when choosing database indexing software. It does include the results of an informal survey an the Yahoogroups database indexing site, as well as three short Gase studies an database indexing projects. The survey provides interesting information about freelancing, but it is not very useful if you are trying to gather information about different software. For example, the most common type of software used by those surveyed turns out to be word-processing software. This seems an odd/awkward choice, and it would have been helpful to know how and why the non-specialized software is being used. The survey serves as a snapshot of a particular segment of database indexing practice, but is not helpful if you are thinking about purchasing, adapting, or commissioning software. The three case studies give an idea of the complexity of database indexing and there is a helpful bibliography.

Languages

  • e 74
  • d 13
  • f 1
  • More… Less…

Types

  • a 75
  • m 10
  • s 2
  • el 1
  • n 1
  • r 1
  • x 1
  • More… Less…

Classifications