Search (12 results, page 1 of 1)

0.05273932 = product of:
  0.08789886 = sum of:
    0.04841807 = weight(_text_:context in 1333) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.04841807 = score(doc=1333,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.17622331 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.14465 = idf(docFreq=1904, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04251826 = queryNorm
        0.27475408 = fieldWeight in 1333, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          4.14465 = idf(docFreq=1904, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1333)
    0.027959513 = weight(_text_:system in 1333) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.027959513 = score(doc=1333,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.13391352 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.1495528 = idf(docFreq=5152, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04251826 = queryNorm
        0.20878783 = fieldWeight in 1333, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.1495528 = idf(docFreq=5152, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1333)
    0.011521274 = product of:
      0.03456382 = sum of:
        0.03456382 = weight(_text_:22 in 1333) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.03456382 = score(doc=1333,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.1488917 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04251826 = queryNorm
            0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 1333, 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=1333)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.6 = coord(3/5)

Abstract

n this article, we report on the first large-scale study of end-user understanding of subject headings. Our objectives were to determine the extent to which children and adults understood subdivided subject headings and to suggest improvements for improving understanding of subject headings. The 1991 Library of Congress Subject Subdivisions Conference suggested standardizing the order of subject subdivisions for the purpose of simplifying subject cataloging, which served as the impetus for the study. We demonstrated that adults understood subject headings better than children; however, both adults and children assigned correct meanings to less than half of the subject headings they examined. Neither subject heading context nor subdivision order had an effect on understanding. Based on our findings, we challenge the library community to make major changes to the Library of Congress Subject Headings system that have the potential to increase end-user understanding of subject headings.

Date

10. 9.2000 17:38:22

0.013047772 = product of:
  0.06523886 = sum of:
    0.06523886 = weight(_text_:system in 7435) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.06523886 = score(doc=7435,freq=8.0), product of:
        0.13391352 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.1495528 = idf(docFreq=5152, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04251826 = queryNorm
        0.4871716 = fieldWeight in 7435, product of:
          2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
            8.0 = termFreq=8.0
          3.1495528 = idf(docFreq=5152, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=7435)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)

Abstract

Describes the comparative approach to system evaluation used in this research project which delegated the administartion of an online retrieval test to an experimental online catalogue to produce data for evaluating the effectiveness of a new subject access design. Describes the methods enlisted to sort out problem test administration, e.g. to identify out-of-scope queries, incomplete system administration, and suspect post-search questionnaire responses. Covers how w the researchers handled problem search administrations and what actions they would use to reduce or eliminate the occurrence of such administrations in future online retrieval tests that delegate control of retrieval tests to online systems

0.012913945 = product of:
  0.06456973 = sum of:
    0.06456973 = weight(_text_:system in 2101) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.06456973 = score(doc=2101,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.13391352 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.1495528 = idf(docFreq=5152, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04251826 = queryNorm
        0.48217484 = fieldWeight in 2101, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          3.1495528 = idf(docFreq=5152, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=2101)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)

Abstract

A prototype expert system for the computer science section (QA75 to QA76.95) of Library of Congress Classification was built using the Mahogany Professional expert system shell. The prototype demonstrates an expert systes application in which the system is enlisted as an intelligent job aid to assist users during the actual performance of shelflisting

0.011183805 = product of:
  0.055919025 = sum of:
    0.055919025 = weight(_text_:system in 386) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.055919025 = score(doc=386,freq=8.0), product of:
        0.13391352 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.1495528 = idf(docFreq=5152, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04251826 = queryNorm
        0.41757566 = fieldWeight in 386, product of:
          2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
            8.0 = termFreq=8.0
          3.1495528 = idf(docFreq=5152, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=386)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)

Abstract

Using subject headings for Online Retrieval is an indispensable tool for online system desingners who are developing new systems or refining exicting ones. The book describes subject analysis and subject searching in online catalogs, including the limitations of retrieval, and demonstrates how such limitations can be overcome through system design and programming. The book describes the Library of Congress Subject headings system and system characteristics, shows how information is stored in machine readable files, and offers examples of and recommendations for successful methods. Tables are included to support these recommendations, and diagrams, graphs, and bar charts are used to provide results of data analyses.

0.0092261685 = product of:
  0.04613084 = sum of:
    0.04613084 = weight(_text_:system in 6742) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.04613084 = score(doc=6742,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.13391352 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.1495528 = idf(docFreq=5152, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04251826 = queryNorm
        0.34448233 = fieldWeight in 6742, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          3.1495528 = idf(docFreq=5152, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=6742)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)

Abstract

Reports results of a study to examine the performance of online catalogue searches involving personal names and to recommend improvements to the basic system approach to soliciting user queries and searching for them. The research questions addressed in the study wre: how online systems can chose searching approaches on their own that are likely to produce useful retrieval; how online systems solicit queries from users; and how users respond to an experimental online catalogue that prompts them for the different elements of their personal name queries. Improvements include: the implementation of a new design for online catalogue searching that features search trees; new methods for soliciting user queries bearing personal names; and enlisting the participation of online catalogue users in the evaluation of system prompts, instructions, and messages that request input from them

0.007908144 = product of:
  0.03954072 = sum of:
    0.03954072 = weight(_text_:system in 543) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.03954072 = score(doc=543,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.13391352 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.1495528 = idf(docFreq=5152, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04251826 = queryNorm
        0.29527056 = fieldWeight in 543, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          3.1495528 = idf(docFreq=5152, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=543)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)

Abstract

This paper recognizes the limitations of the existing file of Library of Congress (LC) subject authority records for subject heading assignment and validation. it makes recommendations for a new file of machine readable authority records for period subdivisions and for enhancements to the existings file of subject authority records. Recommended changes would enable online systems to assist in subject heading formulations and verify, with limited assistance by human intermediaries, the individual components of subdivided headings. The recommendations are timely in view of changes to the forms of period subdivisions that the Library of Congress is studying to facilitate the display of period subdivisions in chronological order. The availability of machine-readable authority records for most period subdivisions would enable online systems to automatically make changes to the forms of period subdivisions in bibliographic records using cross references for previously-used forms in the autority records for the new forms. The paper also discusses issues arising from an enhancement of the existing controlled system of period subdivision. A study of subdivided subject headings in a large bibliographic database forms the basis of the recommendations

0.0065901205 = product of:
  0.032950602 = sum of:
    0.032950602 = weight(_text_:system in 1713) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.032950602 = score(doc=1713,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.13391352 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.1495528 = idf(docFreq=5152, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04251826 = queryNorm
        0.24605882 = fieldWeight in 1713, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          3.1495528 = idf(docFreq=5152, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1713)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)

Abstract

User studies demonstrate that nondomain experts do not use the same information-seeking strategies as domain experts. Because of the transformation of integrated library systems into Information Gateways in the late 1990s, both nondomain experts and domain experts have had available to them the wide range of information-seeking strategies in a single system. This article describes the results of a study to answer three research questions: (1) do nondomain experts enlist the strategies of domain experts? (2) if they do, how did they learn about these strategies? and (3) are they successful using them? Interviews, audio recordings, screen captures, and observations were used to gather data from 14 undergraduate students who searched an academic library's Information Gateway. The few times that the undergraduates in this study enlisted search strategies that were characteristic of domain experts, it usually took perseverance, trial-and-error, serendipity, or a combination of all three for them to find useful information. Although this study's results provide no compelling reasons for systems to support features that make domain-expert strategies possible, there is need for system features that scaffold nondomain experts from their usual strategies to the strategies characteristic of domain experts.

0.006523886 = product of:
  0.03261943 = sum of:
    0.03261943 = weight(_text_:system in 4786) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.03261943 = score(doc=4786,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.13391352 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.1495528 = idf(docFreq=5152, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04251826 = queryNorm
        0.2435858 = fieldWeight in 4786, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.1495528 = idf(docFreq=5152, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=4786)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)

0.0055919024 = product of:
  0.027959513 = sum of:
    0.027959513 = weight(_text_:system in 5164) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.027959513 = score(doc=5164,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.13391352 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.1495528 = idf(docFreq=5152, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04251826 = queryNorm
        0.20878783 = fieldWeight in 5164, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.1495528 = idf(docFreq=5152, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=5164)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)

Abstract

The first studies of online catalog use demonstrated that the problems of too many and too few retrievals plagued the earliest online catalog users. Despite 15 years of system development, implementation, and evaluation, these problems still adversely affect the subject searches of today's online catalog users. In fact, the large-retrievals problem has grown more acute due to the growth of online catalog databases. This paper explores the use of library classifications for consolidating and summarizing high-posted subject searches and for handling subject searches that result in no or too few retrievals. Findings are presented in the form of generalization about retrievals and library classifications, needed improvements to classification terminology, and suggestions for improved functionality to facilitate the display of retrieved titles in online catalogs

0.0046599186 = product of:
  0.023299592 = sum of:
    0.023299592 = weight(_text_:system in 5973) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.023299592 = score(doc=5973,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.13391352 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.1495528 = idf(docFreq=5152, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04251826 = queryNorm
        0.17398985 = fieldWeight in 5973, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.1495528 = idf(docFreq=5152, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=5973)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)

Abstract

Reports results of 2 separate but related projects to study the influence of spelling errors (misspellings), made by searchers, on the subject searching of online catalogues and to suggest ways of improving error detection systems to handle the errors that they detect. This involved the categorization of user queries for subjects that were extracted from the online catalogue transaction logs of 4 USA university libraries. The research questions considered: the prevalence of misspellings in user queries for subjects; and how users respond to online catalogues that detect possible spelling errors in their subject queries. Less than 6% of user queries that match the catalogue's controlled and free text terms were found to contain spelling errors. While the majority of users corrected misspelled query words, a sizable proportion made an action that was even more detrimental than the original misspelling. Concludes with 3 recommended improvements: online catalogues should be equipped with search trees to place the burden of selecting a subject the system instead of the user; systems should be equipped with automatic spelling checking routines that inform users of possibly misspelled words; and online catalogues should be enhanced with tools and techniques to distinguish between queries that fail due to misspellings and correction failures. Cautions that spelling is not a serious problem but can seriously hinder the most routine subject search

0.0027127003 = product of:
  0.013563501 = sum of:
    0.013563501 = product of:
      0.0406905 = sum of:
        0.0406905 = weight(_text_:29 in 2708) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.0406905 = score(doc=2708,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.14956595 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04251826 = queryNorm
            0.27205724 = fieldWeight in 2708, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=2708)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)

Date

17. 1.1999 13:29:55

0.0015361699 = product of:
  0.0076808496 = sum of:
    0.0076808496 = product of:
      0.023042548 = sum of:
        0.023042548 = weight(_text_:22 in 1188) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.023042548 = score(doc=1188,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.1488917 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04251826 = queryNorm
            0.15476047 = fieldWeight in 1188, 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=1188)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)

Date

22. 9.1997 19:16:05