Search (48 results, page 1 of 3)

  • × theme_ss:"Theorie verbaler Dokumentationssprachen"
  • × type_ss:"a"
  1. Takeda, N.: Problems in hierarchical structures in thesauri : their influences on the results of information retrieval (1994) 0.09
    0.0877666 = product of:
      0.1316499 = sum of:
        0.03603666 = weight(_text_:im in 2642) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.03603666 = score(doc=2642,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.1442303 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.8267863 = idf(docFreq=7115, maxDocs=44218)
              0.051022716 = queryNorm
            0.24985497 = fieldWeight in 2642, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              2.8267863 = idf(docFreq=7115, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=2642)
        0.09561324 = product of:
          0.14341986 = sum of:
            0.071946286 = weight(_text_:online in 2642) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.071946286 = score(doc=2642,freq=6.0), product of:
                0.1548489 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.0349014 = idf(docFreq=5778, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.051022716 = queryNorm
                0.4646225 = fieldWeight in 2642, product of:
                  2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
                    6.0 = termFreq=6.0
                  3.0349014 = idf(docFreq=5778, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=2642)
            0.07147358 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 2642) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.07147358 = score(doc=2642,freq=6.0), product of:
                0.15433937 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.051022716 = queryNorm
                0.46309367 = fieldWeight in 2642, product of:
                  2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
                    6.0 = termFreq=6.0
                  3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=2642)
          0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
      0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
    
    Abstract
    In online retrieval search results do not always match the intent in spite of using correct keywords (descriptors). One of the causes of this problem is found in the hierarchical structures of the thesaurus, which often contains relations between broader and narrower concepts, the opposite of which is not necessarily true. Some examples are described from 2 thesauri, MeSH and JICST. In these cases searchers need to make an effort to increase precision
    Source
    Online Kensaku. 15(1994) no.4, S.183-186
    Theme
    Verbale Doksprachen im Online-Retrieval
  2. Lopes, M.I.: Principles underlying subject heading languages : an international approach (1996) 0.06
    0.06497042 = product of:
      0.09745562 = sum of:
        0.031532075 = weight(_text_:im in 5608) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.031532075 = score(doc=5608,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.1442303 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.8267863 = idf(docFreq=7115, maxDocs=44218)
              0.051022716 = queryNorm
            0.2186231 = fieldWeight in 5608, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              2.8267863 = idf(docFreq=7115, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=5608)
        0.06592354 = product of:
          0.09888531 = sum of:
            0.03634593 = weight(_text_:online in 5608) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.03634593 = score(doc=5608,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.1548489 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.0349014 = idf(docFreq=5778, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.051022716 = queryNorm
                0.23471867 = fieldWeight in 5608, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  3.0349014 = idf(docFreq=5778, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=5608)
            0.062539384 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 5608) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.062539384 = score(doc=5608,freq=6.0), product of:
                0.15433937 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.051022716 = queryNorm
                0.40520695 = fieldWeight in 5608, product of:
                  2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
                    6.0 = termFreq=6.0
                  3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=5608)
          0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
      0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
    
    Abstract
    Discusses the problems in establishing commonly accepted principles for subject retrieval between different bibliographic systems. The Working Group on Principles Underlying Subject Heading Languages was established to devise general principles for any subject retrieval system and to review existing real systems in the light of such principles and compare them in order to evaluate the extent of their coverage and their application in current practices. Provides a background and history of the Working Group. Discusses the principles underlying subject headings and their purposes and the state of the work and major findings
    Theme
    Verbale Doksprachen im Online-Retrieval
  3. Miller, U.; Teitelbaum, R.: Pre-coordination and post-coordination : past and future (2002) 0.06
    0.06497042 = product of:
      0.09745562 = sum of:
        0.031532075 = weight(_text_:im in 1395) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.031532075 = score(doc=1395,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.1442303 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.8267863 = idf(docFreq=7115, maxDocs=44218)
              0.051022716 = queryNorm
            0.2186231 = fieldWeight in 1395, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              2.8267863 = idf(docFreq=7115, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=1395)
        0.06592354 = product of:
          0.09888531 = sum of:
            0.03634593 = weight(_text_:online in 1395) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.03634593 = score(doc=1395,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.1548489 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.0349014 = idf(docFreq=5778, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.051022716 = queryNorm
                0.23471867 = fieldWeight in 1395, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  3.0349014 = idf(docFreq=5778, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=1395)
            0.062539384 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 1395) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.062539384 = score(doc=1395,freq=6.0), product of:
                0.15433937 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.051022716 = queryNorm
                0.40520695 = fieldWeight in 1395, product of:
                  2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
                    6.0 = termFreq=6.0
                  3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=1395)
          0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
      0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
    
    Abstract
    This article deals with the meaningful processing of information in relation to two systems of Information processing: pre-coordination and post-coordination. The different approaches are discussed, with emphasis an the need for a controlled vocabulary in information retrieval. Assigned indexing, which employs a controlled vocabulary, is described in detail. Types of indexing language can be divided into two broad groups - those using pre-coordinated terms and those depending an post-coordination. They represent two different basic approaches in processing and Information retrieval. The historical development of these two approaches is described, as well as the two tools that apply to these approaches: thesauri and subject headings.
    Theme
    Verbale Doksprachen im Online-Retrieval
  4. Boteram, F.: Semantische Relationen in Dokumentationssprachen : vom Thesaurus zum semantischen Netz (2010) 0.06
    0.058575716 = product of:
      0.08786357 = sum of:
        0.031532075 = weight(_text_:im in 4792) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.031532075 = score(doc=4792,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.1442303 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.8267863 = idf(docFreq=7115, maxDocs=44218)
              0.051022716 = queryNorm
            0.2186231 = fieldWeight in 4792, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              2.8267863 = idf(docFreq=7115, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=4792)
        0.056331497 = product of:
          0.08449724 = sum of:
            0.03610713 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 4792) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.03610713 = score(doc=4792,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.15433937 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.051022716 = queryNorm
                0.23394634 = fieldWeight in 4792, 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=4792)
            0.048390117 = weight(_text_:22 in 4792) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.048390117 = score(doc=4792,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.17867287 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.051022716 = queryNorm
                0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 4792, 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=4792)
          0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
      0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
    
    Abstract
    Moderne Verfahren des Information Retrieval verlangen nach aussagekräftigen und detailliert relationierten Dokumentationssprachen. Der selektive Transfer einzelner Modellierungsstrategien aus dem Bereich semantischer Technologien für die Gestaltung und Relationierung bestehender Dokumentationssprachen wird diskutiert. In Form einer Taxonomie wird ein hierarchisch strukturiertes Relationeninventar definiert, welches sowohl hinreichend allgemeine als auch zahlreiche spezifische Relationstypen enthält, die eine detaillierte und damit aussagekräftige Relationierung des Vokabulars ermöglichen. Das bringt einen Zugewinn an Übersichtlichkeit und Funktionalität. Im Gegensatz zu anderen Ansätzen und Überlegungen zur Schaffung von Relationeninventaren entwickelt der vorgestellte Vorschlag das Relationeninventar aus der Begriffsmenge eines bestehenden Gegenstandsbereichs heraus.
    Source
    Wissensspeicher in digitalen Räumen: Nachhaltigkeit - Verfügbarkeit - semantische Interoperabilität. Proceedings der 11. Tagung der Deutschen Sektion der Internationalen Gesellschaft für Wissensorganisation, Konstanz, 20. bis 22. Februar 2008. Hrsg.: J. Sieglerschmidt u. H.P.Ohly
  5. Svenonius, E.: LCSH: semantics, syntax and specifity (2000) 0.05
    0.05135473 = product of:
      0.07703209 = sum of:
        0.027027493 = weight(_text_:im in 5599) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.027027493 = score(doc=5599,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.1442303 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.8267863 = idf(docFreq=7115, maxDocs=44218)
              0.051022716 = queryNorm
            0.18739122 = fieldWeight in 5599, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              2.8267863 = idf(docFreq=7115, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=5599)
        0.050004594 = product of:
          0.07500689 = sum of:
            0.04405792 = weight(_text_:online in 5599) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.04405792 = score(doc=5599,freq=4.0), product of:
                0.1548489 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.0349014 = idf(docFreq=5778, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.051022716 = queryNorm
                0.284522 = fieldWeight in 5599, product of:
                  2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                    4.0 = termFreq=4.0
                  3.0349014 = idf(docFreq=5778, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=5599)
            0.03094897 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 5599) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.03094897 = score(doc=5599,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.15433937 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.051022716 = queryNorm
                0.20052543 = fieldWeight in 5599, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=5599)
          0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
      0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
    
    Abstract
    This paper looks at changes affecting LCSH over its 100-year history. Adopting a linguistic conceptualization, it frames these changes as relating to the semantics, syntax and pragmatics of the LCSH language. While its category semantics has remained stable over time, the LCSH relational semantics underwent a significant upheaval when a thesaural structure was imposed upon its traditional See and See also structure. Over time the LCSH syntax has become increasingly complex as it has moved from being largely enumerative to in large part synthetic. Until fairly recently the LCSH pragmatics consisted of only one rule, viz, the injunction to assign specific headings. This rule, always controversial, has become even more debated and interpreted with the move to the online environment
    Theme
    Verbale Doksprachen im Online-Retrieval
  6. Svenonius, E.: LCSH: semantics, syntax and specifity (2000) 0.05
    0.05135473 = product of:
      0.07703209 = sum of:
        0.027027493 = weight(_text_:im in 5602) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.027027493 = score(doc=5602,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.1442303 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.8267863 = idf(docFreq=7115, maxDocs=44218)
              0.051022716 = queryNorm
            0.18739122 = fieldWeight in 5602, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              2.8267863 = idf(docFreq=7115, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=5602)
        0.050004594 = product of:
          0.07500689 = sum of:
            0.04405792 = weight(_text_:online in 5602) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.04405792 = score(doc=5602,freq=4.0), product of:
                0.1548489 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.0349014 = idf(docFreq=5778, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.051022716 = queryNorm
                0.284522 = fieldWeight in 5602, product of:
                  2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                    4.0 = termFreq=4.0
                  3.0349014 = idf(docFreq=5778, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=5602)
            0.03094897 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 5602) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.03094897 = score(doc=5602,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.15433937 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.051022716 = queryNorm
                0.20052543 = fieldWeight in 5602, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=5602)
          0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
      0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
    
    Abstract
    This paper looks at changes affecting LCSH over its 100-year history. Adopting a linguistic conceptualization, it frames these changes as relating to the semantics, syntax and pragmatics of the LCSH language. While its category semantics has remained stable over time, the LCSH relational semantics underwent a significant upheaval when a thesaural structure was imposed upon its traditional See and See also structure. Over time the LCSH syntax has become increasingly complex as it has moved from being largely enumerative to in large part synthetic. Until fairly recently the LCSH pragmatics consisted of only one rule, viz, the injunction to assign specific headings. This rule, always controversial, has become even more debated and interpreted with the move to the online environment
    Theme
    Verbale Doksprachen im Online-Retrieval
  7. Hoerman, H.L.; Furniss, K.A.: Turning practice into principles : a comparison of the IFLA Principles underlying Subject Heading Languages (SHLs) and the principles underlying the Library of Congress Subject Headings system (2000) 0.05
    0.0456195 = product of:
      0.06842925 = sum of:
        0.027027493 = weight(_text_:im in 5611) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.027027493 = score(doc=5611,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.1442303 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.8267863 = idf(docFreq=7115, maxDocs=44218)
              0.051022716 = queryNorm
            0.18739122 = fieldWeight in 5611, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              2.8267863 = idf(docFreq=7115, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=5611)
        0.04140175 = product of:
          0.062102623 = sum of:
            0.031153653 = weight(_text_:online in 5611) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.031153653 = score(doc=5611,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.1548489 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.0349014 = idf(docFreq=5778, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.051022716 = queryNorm
                0.20118743 = fieldWeight in 5611, 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=5611)
            0.03094897 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 5611) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.03094897 = score(doc=5611,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.15433937 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.051022716 = queryNorm
                0.20052543 = fieldWeight in 5611, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=5611)
          0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
      0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
    
    Theme
    Verbale Doksprachen im Online-Retrieval
  8. Engerer, V.: Thesauri, Terminologien, Lexika, Fachsprachen : Kontrolle, physische Verortung und das Prinzip der Syntagmatisierung von Vokabularen (2014) 0.04
    0.040934987 = product of:
      0.061402477 = sum of:
        0.046812993 = weight(_text_:im in 3644) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.046812993 = score(doc=3644,freq=6.0), product of:
            0.1442303 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.8267863 = idf(docFreq=7115, maxDocs=44218)
              0.051022716 = queryNorm
            0.32457113 = fieldWeight in 3644, product of:
              2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
                6.0 = termFreq=6.0
              2.8267863 = idf(docFreq=7115, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=3644)
        0.014589485 = product of:
          0.043768454 = sum of:
            0.043768454 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 3644) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.043768454 = score(doc=3644,freq=4.0), product of:
                0.15433937 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.051022716 = queryNorm
                0.2835858 = fieldWeight in 3644, product of:
                  2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                    4.0 = termFreq=4.0
                  3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=3644)
          0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
      0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
    
    Abstract
    Ich unternehme in diesem Beitrag den Versuch, die Informationswissenschaft - hier gedeutet als 'Information Retrieval'- Disziplin - einer synchronen Querschnittsanalyse zu unterziehen, welche die aktuelle Position dieser Disziplin im Feld anderer zeichen- und wortschatzorientierter Disziplinen (neben der Linguistik die Terminologielehre und die Fachsprachenforschung) näher bestimmen soll. Im Rahmen der Analyse wird von einem Information Retrieval-Kern der Informationswissenschaft ausgegangen, welcher den Informationssuchkontext sowie die Konzepte des Informationsbedarfs und der Relevanz als für diese Disziplin zentrale Komponenten ansieht. Synchron wird das Verhältnis der Informationswissenschaft zu benachbarten Disziplinen durch eine Reihe disziplinspezifischer Zeichenanforderungen erklärt, wodurch ein systemischer Zusammenhang entsteht, der die Informationswissenschaft mit den drei anderen zeichenbezogenen und vokabularorientierten Disziplinen in Beziehung setzt. Das Verhältnis zwischen diesen Disziplinen wird anhand der Dimensionen Kontrolle/Verbindlichkeit sowie Verortung des Vokabulars ("im Kopf" vs. in externen Dokumenten) aufgezeigt, und es wird ein übergeordnetes Prinzip der Syntagmatisierung, welches die beiden Dimensionen vereint, vorgeschlagen.
  9. Panzer, M.: Semantische Integration heterogener und unterschiedlichsprachiger Wissensorganisationssysteme : CrissCross und jenseits (2008) 0.03
    0.029340073 = product of:
      0.04401011 = sum of:
        0.031852208 = weight(_text_:im in 4335) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.031852208 = score(doc=4335,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.1442303 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.8267863 = idf(docFreq=7115, maxDocs=44218)
              0.051022716 = queryNorm
            0.22084267 = fieldWeight in 4335, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              2.8267863 = idf(docFreq=7115, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4335)
        0.012157904 = product of:
          0.03647371 = sum of:
            0.03647371 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 4335) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.03647371 = score(doc=4335,freq=4.0), product of:
                0.15433937 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.051022716 = queryNorm
                0.23632148 = fieldWeight in 4335, product of:
                  2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                    4.0 = termFreq=4.0
                  3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4335)
          0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
      0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
    
    Abstract
    Klassische bibliothekarische Indexierungswerkzeuge werden bis heute nur selten fürs Retrieval nutzbar gemacht; die Wichtigkeit, verschiedene dieser Vokabularien zu harmonisieren und integriert zu verwenden, ist noch immer keine Selbstverständlichkeit. Im Rahmen des DFG-Projektes "CrissCross" wird, ausgehend von der deutschen Ausgabe der Dewey-Dezimalklassifikation, eine Verknüpfung zwischen der DDC und der Schlagwortnormdatei (SWD) aufgebaut, um eine verbale Suche über klassifikatorisch erschlossene Bestände zu ermöglichen. Als Verbreiterung der Basis des verbalen Zugriffs wird außerdem das Mapping der amerikanischen LCSH und des französischen RAMEAU angestrebt. Nach einer kurzen Vorstellung von CrissCross und der Abgrenzung gegenüber ähnlichen Unterfangen werden Rückwirkungen semantischer Integration auf die verknüpften Vokabulare diskutiert. Wie müssen und können sich z.B. Thesauri verändern, wenn sie mit anderen (strukturheterologen) Systemen verknüpft sind? Dabei liegt ein Schwerpunkt der Analyse auf dem semantischen Verhältnis üblicher Mappingrelationen zu den verknüpften Begriffen (besonders im Hinblick auf Polysemie). Außerdem wird der Mehrwert fürs Retrieval auf der Basis solcher Wissensorganisationssysteme, z.B. durch automatisierten Zugriff über Ontologien, diskutiert.
  10. Dextre Clarke, S.G.: Thesaural relationships (2001) 0.02
    0.018777166 = product of:
      0.056331497 = sum of:
        0.056331497 = product of:
          0.08449724 = sum of:
            0.03610713 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 1149) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.03610713 = score(doc=1149,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.15433937 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.051022716 = queryNorm
                0.23394634 = fieldWeight in 1149, 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=1149)
            0.048390117 = weight(_text_:22 in 1149) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.048390117 = score(doc=1149,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.17867287 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.051022716 = queryNorm
                0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 1149, 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=1149)
          0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    
    Abstract
    A thesaurus in the controlled vocabulary environment is a tool designed to support effective infonnation retrieval (IR) by guiding indexers and searchers consistently to choose the same terms for expressing a given concept or combination of concepts. Terms in the thesaurus are linked by relationships of three well-known types: equivalence, hierarchical, and associative. The functions and properties of these three basic types and some subcategories are described, as well as some additional relationship types conunonly found in thesauri. Progressive automation of IR processes and the capability for simultaneous searching of vast networked resources are creating some pressures for change in the categorization and consistency of relationships.
    Date
    22. 9.2007 15:45:57
  11. Tudhope, D.; Alani, H.; Jones, C.: Augmenting thesaurus relationships : possibilities for retrieval (2001) 0.02
    0.018584752 = product of:
      0.055754256 = sum of:
        0.055754256 = product of:
          0.08363138 = sum of:
            0.025961377 = weight(_text_:online in 1520) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.025961377 = score(doc=1520,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.1548489 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.0349014 = idf(docFreq=5778, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.051022716 = queryNorm
                0.16765618 = fieldWeight in 1520, 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=1520)
            0.05767 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 1520) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.05767 = score(doc=1520,freq=10.0), product of:
                0.15433937 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.051022716 = queryNorm
                0.37365708 = fieldWeight in 1520, product of:
                  3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
                    10.0 = termFreq=10.0
                  3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1520)
          0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    
    Abstract
    This paper discusses issues concerning the augmentation of thesaurus relationships, in light of new application possibilities for retrieval. We first discuss a case study that explored the retrieval potential of an augmented set of thesaurus relationships by specialising standard relationships into richer subtypes, in particular hierarchical geographical containment and the associative relationship. We then locate this work in a broader context by reviewing various attempts to build taxonomies of thesaurus relationships, and conclude by discussing the feasibility of hierarchically augmenting the core set of thesaurus relationships, particularly the associative relationship. We discuss the possibility of enriching the specification and semantics of Related Term (RT relationships), while maintaining compatibility with traditional thesauri via a limited hierarchical extension of the associative (and hierarchical) relationships. This would be facilitated by distinguishing the type of term from the (sub)type of relationship and explicitly specifying semantic categories for terms following a faceted approach. We first illustrate how hierarchical spatial relationships can be used to provide more flexible retrieval for queries incorporating place names in applications employing online gazetteers and geographical thesauri. We then employ a set of experimental scenarios to investigate key issues affecting use of the associative (RT) thesaurus relationships in semantic distance measures. Previous work has noted the potential of RTs in thesaurus search aids but also the problem of uncontrolled expansion of query term sets. Results presented in this paper suggest the potential for taking account of the hierarchical context of an RT link and specialisations of the RT relationship
    Theme
    Semantisches Umfeld in Indexierung u. Retrieval
  12. Sechser, O.: Beziehungen im Sprachsystem und in Texten (1992) 0.02
    0.01801833 = product of:
      0.054054987 = sum of:
        0.054054987 = weight(_text_:im in 1369) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.054054987 = score(doc=1369,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.1442303 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.8267863 = idf(docFreq=7115, maxDocs=44218)
              0.051022716 = queryNorm
            0.37478244 = fieldWeight in 1369, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              2.8267863 = idf(docFreq=7115, maxDocs=44218)
              0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=1369)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    
  13. Maniez, J.: Fusion de banques de donnees documentaires at compatibilite des languages d'indexation (1997) 0.02
    0.016094714 = product of:
      0.048284143 = sum of:
        0.048284143 = product of:
          0.072426215 = sum of:
            0.03094897 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 2246) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.03094897 = score(doc=2246,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.15433937 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.051022716 = queryNorm
                0.20052543 = fieldWeight in 2246, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2246)
            0.04147724 = weight(_text_:22 in 2246) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.04147724 = score(doc=2246,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.17867287 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.051022716 = queryNorm
                0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 2246, 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=2246)
          0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    
    Abstract
    Discusses the apparently unattainable goal of compatibility of information languages. While controlled languages can improve retrieval performance within a single system, they make cooperation across different systems more difficult. The Internet and downloading accentuate this adverse outcome and the acceleration of data exchange aggravates the problem of compatibility. Defines this familiar concept and demonstrates that coherence is just as necessary as it was for indexing languages, the proliferation of which has created confusion in grouped data banks. Describes 2 types of potential solutions, similar to those applied to automatic translation of natural languages: - harmonizing the information languages themselves, both difficult and expensive, or, the more flexible solution involving automatic harmonization of indexing formulae based on pre established concordance tables. However, structural incompatibilities between post coordinated languages and classifications may lead any harmonization tools up a blind alley, while the paths of a universal concordance model are rare and narrow
    Date
    1. 8.1996 22:01:00
  14. Farradane, J.E.L.: Fundamental fallacies and new needs in classification (1985) 0.01
    0.013872325 = product of:
      0.020808488 = sum of:
        0.013513747 = weight(_text_:im in 3642) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.013513747 = score(doc=3642,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.1442303 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.8267863 = idf(docFreq=7115, maxDocs=44218)
              0.051022716 = queryNorm
            0.09369561 = fieldWeight in 3642, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              2.8267863 = idf(docFreq=7115, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0234375 = fieldNorm(doc=3642)
        0.0072947424 = product of:
          0.021884227 = sum of:
            0.021884227 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 3642) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.021884227 = score(doc=3642,freq=4.0), product of:
                0.15433937 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.051022716 = queryNorm
                0.1417929 = fieldWeight in 3642, product of:
                  2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                    4.0 = termFreq=4.0
                  3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0234375 = fieldNorm(doc=3642)
          0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
      0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
    
    Abstract
    This chapter from The Sayers Memorial Volume summarizes Farradane's earlier work in which he developed his major themes by drawing in part upon research in psychology, and particularly those discoveries called "cognitive" which now form part of cognitive science. Farradane, a chemist by training who later became an information scientist and Director of the Center for Information Science, City University, London, from 1958 to 1973, defines the various types of methods used to achieve classification systems-philosophic, scientific, and synthetic. Early an he distinguishes the view that classification is "some part of external 'reality' waiting to be discovered" from that view which considers it "an intellectual operation upon mental entities and concepts." Classification, therefore, is to be treated as a mental construct and not as something "out there" to be discovered as, say, in astronomy or botany. His approach could be termed, somewhat facetiously, as an "in there" one, meaning found by utilizing the human brain as the key tool. This is not to say that discoveries in astronomy or botany do not require the use of the brain as a key tool. It is merely that the "material" worked upon by this tool is presented to it for observation by "that inward eye," by memory and by inference rather than by planned physical observation, memory, and inference. This distinction could be refined or clarified by considering the initial "observation" as a specific kind of mental set required in each case. Farradane then proceeds to demolish the notion of main classes as "fictitious," partly because the various category-defining methodologies used in library classification are "randomly mixed." The implication, probably correct, is that this results in mixed metaphorical concepts. It is an interesting contrast to the approach of Julia Pettee (q.v.), who began with indexing terms and, in studying relationships between terms, discovered hidden hierarchies both between the terms themselves and between the cross-references leading from one term or set of terms to another. One is tempted to ask two questions: "Is hierarchy innate but misinterpreted?" and "ls it possible to have meaningful terms which have only categorical relationships (that have no see also or equivalent relationships to other, out-of-category terms)?" Partly as a result of the rejection of existing general library classification systems, the Classification Research Group-of which Farradane was a charter member decided to adopt the principles of Ranganathan's faceted classification system, while rejecting his limit an the number of fundamental categories. The advantage of the faceted method is that it is created by inductive, rather than deductive, methods. It can be altered more readily to keep up with changes in and additions to the knowledge base in a subject without having to re-do the major schedules. In 1961, when Farradane's paper appeared, the computer was beginning to be viewed as a tool for solving all information retrieval problems. He tartly remarks:
    The basic fallacy of mechanised information retrieval systems seems to be the often unconscious but apparently implied assumption that the machine can inject meaning into a group of juxtaposed terms although no methods of conceptual analysis and re-synthesis have been programmed (p. 203). As an example, he suggests considering the slight but vital differences in the meaning of the word "of" in selected examples: swarm of bees house of the mayor House of Lords spectrum of the sun basket of fish meeting of councillors cooking of meat book of the film Farradane's distinctive contribution is his matrix of basic relationships. The rows concern time and memory, in degree of happenstance: coincidentally, occasionally, or always. The columns represent degree of the "powers of discrimination": occurring together, linked by common elements only, or standing alone. To make these relationships easily managed, he used symbols for each of the nine kinds - "symbols found an every typewriter": /O (Theta) /* /; /= /+ /( /) /_ /: Farradane has maintained his basic insights to the present day. Though he has gone an to do other kinds of research in classification, his work indicates that he still believes that "the primary task ... is that of establishing satisfactory and enduring principles of subject analysis, or classification" (p. 208).
    Footnote
    Original in: The Sayers memorial volume: essays in librarianship im memory of William Charles Berwick Sayers. London: The Library Association 1961. S.120-135.
  15. Mooers, C.N.: ¬The indexing language of an information retrieval system (1985) 0.01
    0.012325501 = product of:
      0.0369765 = sum of:
        0.0369765 = product of:
          0.055464752 = sum of:
            0.031269692 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 3644) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.031269692 = score(doc=3644,freq=6.0), product of:
                0.15433937 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.051022716 = queryNorm
                0.20260347 = fieldWeight in 3644, product of:
                  2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
                    6.0 = termFreq=6.0
                  3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.02734375 = fieldNorm(doc=3644)
            0.024195058 = weight(_text_:22 in 3644) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.024195058 = score(doc=3644,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.17867287 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.051022716 = queryNorm
                0.1354154 = fieldWeight in 3644, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.02734375 = fieldNorm(doc=3644)
          0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    
    Abstract
    Calvin Mooers' work toward the resolution of the problem of ambiguity in indexing went unrecognized for years. At the time he introduced the "descriptor" - a term with a very distinct meaning-indexers were, for the most part, taking index terms directly from the document, without either rationalizing them with context or normalizing them with some kind of classification. It is ironic that Mooers' term came to be attached to the popular but unsophisticated indexing methods which he was trying to root out. Simply expressed, what Mooers did was to take the dictionary definitions of terms and redefine them so clearly that they could not be used in any context except that provided by the new definition. He did, at great pains, construct such meanings for over four hundred words; disambiguation and specificity were sought after and found for these words. He proposed that all indexers adopt this method so that when the index supplied a term, it also supplied the exact meaning for that term as used in the indexed document. The same term used differently in another document would be defined differently and possibly renamed to avoid ambiguity. The disambiguation was achieved by using unabridged dictionaries and other sources of defining terminology. In practice, this tends to produce circularity in definition, that is, word A refers to word B which refers to word C which refers to word A. It was necessary, therefore, to break this chain by creating a new, definitive meaning for each word. Eventually, means such as those used by Austin (q.v.) for PRECIS achieved the same purpose, but by much more complex means than just creating a unique definition of each term. Mooers, however, was probably the first to realize how confusing undefined terminology could be. Early automatic indexers dealt with distinct disciplines and, as long as they did not stray beyond disciplinary boundaries, a quick and dirty keyword approach was satisfactory. The trouble came when attempts were made to make a combined index for two or more distinct disciplines. A number of processes have since been developed, mostly involving tagging of some kind or use of strings. Mooers' solution has rarely been considered seriously and probably would be extremely difficult to apply now because of so much interdisciplinarity. But for a specific, weIl defined field, it is still weIl worth considering. Mooers received training in mathematics and physics from the University of Minnesota and the Massachusetts Institute of Technology. He was the founder of Zator Company, which developed and marketed a coded card information retrieval system, and of Rockford Research, Inc., which engages in research in information science. He is the inventor of the TRAC computer language.
    Footnote
    Original in: Information retrieval today: papers presented at an Institute conducted by the Library School and the Center for Continuation Study, University of Minnesota, Sept. 19-22, 1962. Ed. by Wesley Simonton. Minneapolis, Minn.: The Center, 1963. S.21-36.
  16. Farradane, J.: Concept organization for information retrieval (1967) 0.01
    0.011347376 = product of:
      0.034042127 = sum of:
        0.034042127 = product of:
          0.10212638 = sum of:
            0.10212638 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 35) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.10212638 = score(doc=35,freq=4.0), product of:
                0.15433937 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.051022716 = queryNorm
                0.6617001 = fieldWeight in 35, product of:
                  2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                    4.0 = termFreq=4.0
                  3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=35)
          0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    
    Source
    Information storage and retrieval. 3(1967) S.297-314
  17. Ruge, G.: ¬A spreading activation network for automatic generation of thesaurus relationships (1991) 0.01
    0.01075336 = product of:
      0.03226008 = sum of:
        0.03226008 = product of:
          0.09678023 = sum of:
            0.09678023 = weight(_text_:22 in 4506) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.09678023 = score(doc=4506,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.17867287 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.051022716 = queryNorm
                0.5416616 = fieldWeight in 4506, 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=4506)
          0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    
    Date
    8.10.2000 11:52:22
  18. Fugmann, R.: ¬Der Mangel an Grammatik bei Indexsprachen und seine Folgen (1987) 0.01
    0.00979065 = product of:
      0.029371947 = sum of:
        0.029371947 = product of:
          0.08811584 = sum of:
            0.08811584 = weight(_text_:online in 257) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.08811584 = score(doc=257,freq=4.0), product of:
                0.1548489 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.0349014 = idf(docFreq=5778, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.051022716 = queryNorm
                0.569044 = fieldWeight in 257, product of:
                  2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                    4.0 = termFreq=4.0
                  3.0349014 = idf(docFreq=5778, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=257)
          0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    
    Source
    9. Online-Frühjahrstagung der Online-Benutzergruppe der DGD, Frankfurt am Main, 12.-14.5.1987: Vorträge
  19. Fox, E.A.: Lexical relations : enhancing effectiveness of information retrieval systems (1980) 0.01
    0.009170066 = product of:
      0.027510196 = sum of:
        0.027510196 = product of:
          0.08253059 = sum of:
            0.08253059 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 5310) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.08253059 = score(doc=5310,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.15433937 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.051022716 = queryNorm
                0.5347345 = fieldWeight in 5310, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.125 = fieldNorm(doc=5310)
          0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    
  20. Krömmelbein, U.: Linguistische und fachwissenschaftliche Gesichtspunkte der Schlagwortsyntax : Eine vergleichende Untersuchung der Regeln für die Schlagwortvergabe der Deutschen Bibliothek, der RSWK und der Indexierungsverfahren Voll-PRECIS und Kurz-PRECIS (1984) 0.01
    0.009009165 = product of:
      0.027027493 = sum of:
        0.027027493 = weight(_text_:im in 984) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.027027493 = score(doc=984,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.1442303 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.8267863 = idf(docFreq=7115, maxDocs=44218)
              0.051022716 = queryNorm
            0.18739122 = fieldWeight in 984, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              2.8267863 = idf(docFreq=7115, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=984)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    
    Abstract
    Die deutsche Bibliothek in Frankfurt bietet seit einigen Jahren zentrale Dienste im Bereich der verbalen Sacherschließung an, Um deren Akzeptanz zu verbessern, will die Deutsche Bibliothek ab 1986 von der augenblicklichen gleichordnenden Indexierung zu einem syntaktischen Verfahren übergehen. Als Alternativen standen die RSWK und eine verkürzte Version des britischen Indexierungsverfahrens PRECIS zur Diskussion. Die Anforderungen einer Fachwissenschaft an die Schlagwort-Syntax einer adäquaten Dokumentationssprache werden exemplarisch entwickelt, die vier Alternativen - augenblickliche verbale Sacherschließunf der DB, RSWK, PRECIS (britische Version) und Kurz-PRECIS (DB-Version) - an ihnen gemessen. Die Kriterien basiern auf Grammatiktheorien der modernen Linguistik und gehen von einer Analogie zwischen Dokumentationssprachen und natürlicher Sprache aus.