Search (51 results, page 1 of 3)

0.25589505 = product of:
  0.30707407 = sum of:
    0.09979041 = weight(_text_:umfeld in 1464) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.09979041 = score(doc=1464,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.26788878 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.619245 = idf(docFreq=435, maxDocs=44218)
          0.047673445 = queryNorm
        0.37250686 = fieldWeight in 1464, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          5.619245 = idf(docFreq=435, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1464)
    0.014323489 = weight(_text_:in in 1464) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.014323489 = score(doc=1464,freq=12.0), product of:
        0.06484802 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.047673445 = queryNorm
        0.22087781 = fieldWeight in 1464, product of:
          3.4641016 = tf(freq=12.0), with freq of:
            12.0 = termFreq=12.0
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1464)
    0.09140319 = weight(_text_:indexierung in 1464) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.09140319 = score(doc=1464,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.25638393 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.377919 = idf(docFreq=554, maxDocs=44218)
          0.047673445 = queryNorm
        0.35650903 = fieldWeight in 1464, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          5.377919 = idf(docFreq=554, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1464)
    0.033885043 = weight(_text_:u in 1464) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.033885043 = score(doc=1464,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.15610404 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.2744443 = idf(docFreq=4547, maxDocs=44218)
          0.047673445 = queryNorm
        0.21706703 = fieldWeight in 1464, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.2744443 = idf(docFreq=4547, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1464)
    0.067671955 = sum of:
      0.028917395 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 1464) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.028917395 = score(doc=1464,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.14420812 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
            0.047673445 = queryNorm
          0.20052543 = fieldWeight in 1464, 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=1464)
      0.03875456 = weight(_text_:22 in 1464) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.03875456 = score(doc=1464,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.16694428 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.047673445 = queryNorm
          0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 1464, 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=1464)
  0.8333333 = coord(5/6)

Abstract

This paper attempts to explore an approach of using an automatic semantic analysis tool to enhance the "subject" access to materials that are not included in the usual library subject cataloging process. Using two research samples the authors analyzed the access points supplied by OpenCalais, a semantic analysis tool. As an aid in understanding how computerized subject analysis might be approached, this paper suggests using the three-layer framework that has been accepted and applied in image analysis, developed by Erwin Panofsky.

Series

Advances in knowledge organization; vol. 14

Source

Knowledge organization in the 21st century: between historical patterns and future prospects. Proceedings of the Thirteenth International ISKO Conference 19-22 May 2014, Kraków, Poland. Ed.: Wieslaw Babik

Theme

Semantisches Umfeld in Indexierung u. Retrieval

0.022073656 = product of:
  0.06622097 = sum of:
    0.0097459 = weight(_text_:in in 2988) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0097459 = score(doc=2988,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.06484802 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.047673445 = queryNorm
        0.15028831 = fieldWeight in 2988, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=2988)
    0.056475073 = weight(_text_:u in 2988) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.056475073 = score(doc=2988,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.15610404 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.2744443 = idf(docFreq=4547, maxDocs=44218)
          0.047673445 = queryNorm
        0.3617784 = fieldWeight in 2988, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.2744443 = idf(docFreq=4547, maxDocs=44218)
          0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=2988)
  0.33333334 = coord(2/6)

Source

Re:inventing information science in the networked society: Proceedings of the 14th International Symposium on Information Science, Zadar/Croatia, 19th-21st May 2015. Eds.: F. Pehar, C. Schloegl u. C. Wolff

0.019561458 = product of:
  0.05868437 = sum of:
    0.013504315 = weight(_text_:in in 4694) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.013504315 = score(doc=4694,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.06484802 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.047673445 = queryNorm
        0.2082456 = fieldWeight in 4694, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=4694)
    0.045180056 = weight(_text_:u in 4694) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.045180056 = score(doc=4694,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.15610404 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.2744443 = idf(docFreq=4547, maxDocs=44218)
          0.047673445 = queryNorm
        0.28942272 = fieldWeight in 4694, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.2744443 = idf(docFreq=4547, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=4694)
  0.33333334 = coord(2/6)

Series

Advances in knowledge organization; vol.16

Source

Challenges and opportunities for knowledge organization in the digital age: proceedings of the Fifteenth International ISKO Conference, 9-11 July 2018, Porto, Portugal / organized by: International Society for Knowledge Organization (ISKO), ISKO Spain and Portugal Chapter, University of Porto - Faculty of Arts and Humanities, Research Centre in Communication, Information and Digital Culture (CIC.digital) - Porto. Eds.: F. Ribeiro u. M.E. Cerveira

0.017116275 = product of:
  0.051348824 = sum of:
    0.011816275 = weight(_text_:in in 4787) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.011816275 = score(doc=4787,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.06484802 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.047673445 = queryNorm
        0.1822149 = fieldWeight in 4787, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=4787)
    0.03953255 = weight(_text_:u in 4787) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.03953255 = score(doc=4787,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.15610404 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.2744443 = idf(docFreq=4547, maxDocs=44218)
          0.047673445 = queryNorm
        0.25324488 = fieldWeight in 4787, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.2744443 = idf(docFreq=4547, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=4787)
  0.33333334 = coord(2/6)

Abstract

The Functional Requirements for Subject Authority Records Working Group (FRSAR WG) is the third IFLA Working Group of the FRBR family. It was formed in April 2005 and it was charged with the task of developing a conceptual model of FRBR Group 3 entities within the FRBR framework as they relate to the "aboutness" of works. This paper introduces the Functional Requirements for Subject Authority Data (FRSAD), the model developed by the FRSAR WG, and discusses issues raised during the world-wide review.

Source

Concepts in context: Proceedings of the Cologne Conference on Interoperability and Semantics in Knowledge Organization July 19th - 20th, 2010. Eds.: F. Boteram, W. Gödert u. J. Hubrich

0.016816547 = product of:
  0.05044964 = sum of:
    0.011695079 = weight(_text_:in in 3184) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.011695079 = score(doc=3184,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.06484802 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.047673445 = queryNorm
        0.18034597 = fieldWeight in 3184, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=3184)
    0.03875456 = product of:
      0.07750912 = sum of:
        0.07750912 = weight(_text_:22 in 3184) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.07750912 = score(doc=3184,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.16694428 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.047673445 = queryNorm
            0.46428138 = fieldWeight in 3184, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=3184)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.33333334 = coord(2/6)

Content

Vortrag anläasslich des Workshops: "Extending the multilingual capacity of The European Library in the EDL project Stockholm, Swedish National Library, 22-23 November 2007".

0.01645206 = product of:
  0.049356177 = sum of:
    0.015471136 = weight(_text_:in in 1682) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.015471136 = score(doc=1682,freq=14.0), product of:
        0.06484802 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.047673445 = queryNorm
        0.23857531 = fieldWeight in 1682, product of:
          3.7416575 = tf(freq=14.0), with freq of:
            14.0 = termFreq=14.0
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1682)
    0.033885043 = weight(_text_:u in 1682) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.033885043 = score(doc=1682,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.15610404 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.2744443 = idf(docFreq=4547, maxDocs=44218)
          0.047673445 = queryNorm
        0.21706703 = fieldWeight in 1682, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.2744443 = idf(docFreq=4547, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1682)
  0.33333334 = coord(2/6)

Abstract

TEL-ME-MOR is funded by European Commission, Directorate E - Content, as a result of the third call for proposals published in 2004, under the Sixth Framework Programme (FP6). As part of Workpackage 3 the national libraries of the 10 New Member States responded to a questionnaire to enable the TEL-ME-MOR project to establish an overview of subject access tools and practice in their institutions. Results are analysed and areas for further study are identified, in particular in the field of cross language access.

Series

Fortschritte in der Wissensorganisation; Bd.10

Source

Kompatibilität, Medien und Ethik in der Wissensorganisation - Compatibility, Media and Ethics in Knowledge Organization: Proceedings der 10. Tagung der Deutschen Sektion der Internationalen Gesellschaft für Wissensorganisation Wien, 3.-5. Juli 2006 - Proceedings of the 10th Conference of the German Section of the International Society of Knowledge Organization Vienna, 3-5 July 2006. Ed.: H.P. Ohly, S. Netscher u. K. Mitgutsch

0.01545156 = product of:
  0.046354678 = sum of:
    0.0068221292 = weight(_text_:in in 279) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0068221292 = score(doc=279,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.06484802 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.047673445 = queryNorm
        0.10520181 = fieldWeight in 279, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=279)
    0.03953255 = weight(_text_:u in 279) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.03953255 = score(doc=279,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.15610404 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.2744443 = idf(docFreq=4547, maxDocs=44218)
          0.047673445 = queryNorm
        0.25324488 = fieldWeight in 279, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.2744443 = idf(docFreq=4547, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=279)
  0.33333334 = coord(2/6)

Series

Advances in knowledge organization; vol.10

Source

Knowledge organization for a global learning society: Proceedings of the 9th International ISKO Conference, 4-7 July 2006, Vienna, Austria. Hrsg.: G. Budin, C. Swertz u. K. Mitgutsch

0.014671094 = product of:
  0.04401328 = sum of:
    0.010128236 = weight(_text_:in in 846) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.010128236 = score(doc=846,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.06484802 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.047673445 = queryNorm
        0.1561842 = fieldWeight in 846, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=846)
    0.033885043 = weight(_text_:u in 846) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.033885043 = score(doc=846,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.15610404 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.2744443 = idf(docFreq=4547, maxDocs=44218)
          0.047673445 = queryNorm
        0.21706703 = fieldWeight in 846, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.2744443 = idf(docFreq=4547, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=846)
  0.33333334 = coord(2/6)

Abstract

The paper presents the approach of using the Functional Requirements for Bibliographic Records (FRBR) model to investigate the complicated sets of relationships among different versions of a classification system for the purposes of specifying provenance of classification data and facilitating collaborative efforts for using and reusing classification data, particularly in a linked data setting. The long-term goal of this research goes beyond the Dewey Decimal Classification that is used as a case. It addresses the questions of if and how the modelling approach and the FRBR-based model itself can be generalized and applied to other classification systems, multilingual and multicultural vocabularies, and even non-KOS resources that share similar characteristics.

Series

Advances in knowledge organization; vol.13

Source

Categories, contexts and relations in knowledge organization: Proceedings of the Twelfth International ISKO Conference 6-9 August 2012, Mysore, India. Eds.: Neelameghan, A. u. K.S. Raghavan

0.014647653 = product of:
  0.043942958 = sum of:
    0.01653934 = weight(_text_:in in 1967) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.01653934 = score(doc=1967,freq=16.0), product of:
        0.06484802 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.047673445 = queryNorm
        0.25504774 = fieldWeight in 1967, product of:
          4.0 = tf(freq=16.0), with freq of:
            16.0 = termFreq=16.0
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1967)
    0.027403615 = product of:
      0.05480723 = sum of:
        0.05480723 = weight(_text_:22 in 1967) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.05480723 = score(doc=1967,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.16694428 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.047673445 = queryNorm
            0.32829654 = fieldWeight in 1967, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1967)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.33333334 = coord(2/6)

Abstract

This paper reports on the second part of an initiative of the authors on researching classification systems with the conceptual model defined by the Functional Requirements for Subject Authority Data (FRSAD) final report. In an earlier study, the authors explored whether the FRSAD conceptual model could be extended beyond subject authority data to model classification data. The focus of the current study is to determine if classification data modeled using FRSAD can be used to solve real-world discovery problems in multicultural and multilingual contexts. The paper discusses the relationships between entities (same type or different types) in the context of classification systems that involve multiple translations and /or multicultural implementations. Results of two case studies are presented in detail: (a) two instances of the DDC (DDC 22 in English, and the Swedish-English mixed translation of DDC 22), and (b) Chinese Library Classification. The use cases of conceptual models in practice are also discussed.

Source

Beyond libraries - subject metadata in the digital environment and semantic web. IFLA Satellite Post-Conference, 17-18 August 2012, Tallinn

0.012485065 = product of:
  0.037455194 = sum of:
    0.014618848 = weight(_text_:in in 1962) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.014618848 = score(doc=1962,freq=18.0), product of:
        0.06484802 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.047673445 = queryNorm
        0.22543246 = fieldWeight in 1962, product of:
          4.2426405 = tf(freq=18.0), with freq of:
            18.0 = termFreq=18.0
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1962)
    0.022836344 = product of:
      0.04567269 = sum of:
        0.04567269 = weight(_text_:22 in 1962) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.04567269 = score(doc=1962,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.16694428 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.047673445 = queryNorm
            0.27358043 = fieldWeight in 1962, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1962)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.33333334 = coord(2/6)

Abstract

This article reports on the second part of an initiative of the authors on researching classification systems with the conceptual model defined by the Functional Requirements for Subject Authority Data (FRSAD) final report. In an earlier study, the authors explored whether the FRSAD conceptual model could be extended beyond subject authority data to model classification data. The focus of the current study is to determine if classification data modeled using FRSAD can be used to solve real-world discovery problems in multicultural and multilingual contexts. The article discusses the relationships between entities (same type or different types) in the context of classification systems that involve multiple translations and/or multicultural implementations. Results of two case studies are presented in detail: (a) two instances of the Dewey Decimal Classification [DDC] (DDC 22 in English, and the Swedish-English mixed translation of DDC 22), and (b) Chinese Library Classification. The use cases of conceptual models in practice are also discussed.

Footnote

Contribution in a special issue "Beyond libraries: Subject metadata in the digital environment and Semantic Web" - Enthält Beiträge der gleichnamigen IFLA Satellite Post-Conference, 17-18 August 2012, Tallinn.

0.01123359 = product of:
  0.033700768 = sum of:
    0.014323489 = weight(_text_:in in 2610) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.014323489 = score(doc=2610,freq=12.0), product of:
        0.06484802 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.047673445 = queryNorm
        0.22087781 = fieldWeight in 2610, product of:
          3.4641016 = tf(freq=12.0), with freq of:
            12.0 = termFreq=12.0
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2610)
    0.01937728 = product of:
      0.03875456 = sum of:
        0.03875456 = weight(_text_:22 in 2610) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.03875456 = score(doc=2610,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.16694428 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.047673445 = queryNorm
            0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 2610, 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=2610)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.33333334 = coord(2/6)

Abstract

Aggregates have been a frequent topic of discussion between library science researchers. This study seeks to better understand aggregates through the analysis of a sample of bibliographic records and review of the cataloging treatment of aggregates. The study focuses on determining how common aggregates are in library collections, what types of aggregates exist, how aggregates are described in bibliographic records, and the criteria for identifying aggregates from the information in bibliographic records. A sample of bibliographic records representing textual resources was taken from OCLC's WorldCat database. More than 20 percent of the sampled records represented aggregates and more works were embodied in aggregates than were embodied in single work manifestations. A variety of issues, including cataloging practices and the varying definitions of aggregates, made it difficult to accurately identify and quantify the presence of aggregates using only the information from bibliographic records.

Date

10. 9.2000 17:38:22

0.011036828 = product of:
  0.033110484 = sum of:
    0.00487295 = weight(_text_:in in 4828) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.00487295 = score(doc=4828,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.06484802 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.047673445 = queryNorm
        0.07514416 = fieldWeight in 4828, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4828)
    0.028237537 = weight(_text_:u in 4828) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.028237537 = score(doc=4828,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.15610404 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.2744443 = idf(docFreq=4547, maxDocs=44218)
          0.047673445 = queryNorm
        0.1808892 = fieldWeight in 4828, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.2744443 = idf(docFreq=4547, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4828)
  0.33333334 = coord(2/6)

Abstract

The Functional Requirements for Subject Authority Data (FRSAD) conceptual model identifies entities, attributes and relationships as they relate to subject authority data. FRSAD includes two main entities, thema (any entity used as a subject of a work) and nomen (any sign or sequence of signs that a thema is known by, referred to, or addressed as). In a given controlled vocabulary and within a domain, a nomen is the appellation of only one thema. The authors consider the question, can the FRSAD conceptual model be extended beyond controlled vocabularies (its original focus) to model classification data? Models that are developed based on the structures and functions of controlled vocabularies (such as thesauri and subject heading systems) often need to be adjusted or extended to accommodate classification systems that have been developed with different focused functions, structures and fundamental theories. The Dewey Decimal Classification (DDC) system is used as a case study to test applicability of the FRSAD model for classification data, and as a springboard for a general discussion of issues related to the use of FRSAD for the representation of classification data.

Source

Classification and ontology: formal approaches and access to knowledge: proceedings of the International UDC Seminar, 19-20 September 2011, The Hague, The Netherlands. Eds.: A. Slavic u. E. Civallero

0.011036828 = product of:
  0.033110484 = sum of:
    0.00487295 = weight(_text_:in in 2284) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.00487295 = score(doc=2284,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.06484802 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.047673445 = queryNorm
        0.07514416 = fieldWeight in 2284, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2284)
    0.028237537 = weight(_text_:u in 2284) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.028237537 = score(doc=2284,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.15610404 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.2744443 = idf(docFreq=4547, maxDocs=44218)
          0.047673445 = queryNorm
        0.1808892 = fieldWeight in 2284, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.2744443 = idf(docFreq=4547, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2284)
  0.33333334 = coord(2/6)

Abstract

The Functional Requirements for Subject Authority Data (FRSAD) conceptual model defines entities, attributes and relationships as they relate to subject authority data. FRSAD includes two main entities, thema (any entity used as the subject of a work) and nomen (any sign or arrangement of signs that a thema is known by, referred to, or addressed as). In a given controlled vocabulary and within a domain, a nomen is the appellation of only one thema. The authors consider the question: can the FRSAD conceptual model be extended beyond controlled vocabularies (its original focus) to model classification data? Models that are developed based on the structures and functions of controlled vocabularies (such as thesauri and subject heading systems) often need to be adjusted or extended to accommodate classification systems that have been developed with different focused functions, structures and fundamental theories. The Dewey Decimal Classification (DDC) system and Universal Decimal Classification (UDC) are used as a case study to test applicability of the FRSAD model for classification data and the applicability of the Functional Requirements for Bibliographic Records (FRBR) for modelling versions, such as different adaptations and different language editions.

Source

Classification and authority control: expanding resource discovery: proceedings of the International UDC Seminar 2015, 29-30 October 2015, Lisbon, Portugal. Eds.: Slavic, A. u. M.I. Cordeiro

0.010751593 = product of:
  0.032254778 = sum of:
    0.009647949 = weight(_text_:in in 4346) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.009647949 = score(doc=4346,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.06484802 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.047673445 = queryNorm
        0.14877784 = fieldWeight in 4346, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=4346)
    0.022606827 = product of:
      0.045213655 = sum of:
        0.045213655 = weight(_text_:22 in 4346) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.045213655 = score(doc=4346,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.16694428 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.047673445 = queryNorm
            0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 4346, 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=4346)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.33333334 = coord(2/6)

Abstract

The Working group on Guidelines for (electronic) national bibliographies has started the work with an analysis of users and use of national bibliographies (NB). In addition to the well known importance of NB for libraries and librarians, other users and their requirements were identified. The results are presented and discussed; both existing and potential users and use were taken into account. The group will continue the work by specifying the functionality to support the various needs of different users.

Date

1.11.2005 18:56:22

0.009835172 = product of:
  0.029505517 = sum of:
    0.010128236 = weight(_text_:in in 1347) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.010128236 = score(doc=1347,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.06484802 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.047673445 = queryNorm
        0.1561842 = fieldWeight in 1347, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1347)
    0.01937728 = product of:
      0.03875456 = sum of:
        0.03875456 = weight(_text_:22 in 1347) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.03875456 = score(doc=1347,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.16694428 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.047673445 = queryNorm
            0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 1347, 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=1347)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.33333334 = coord(2/6)

Abstract

Terminology registries (TRs) are a crucial element of the infrastructure required for resource discovery services, digital libraries, Linked Data, and semantic interoperability generally. They can make the content of knowledge organization systems (KOS) available both for human and machine access. The paper describes the attributes and functionality for a TR, based on a review of published literature, existing TRs, and a survey of experts. A domain model based on user tasks is constructed and a set of core metadata elements for use in TRs is proposed. Ideally, the TR should allow searching as well as browsing for a KOS, matching a user's search while also providing information about existing terminology services, accessible to both humans and machines. The issues surrounding metadata for KOS are also discussed, together with the rationale for different aspects and the importance of a core set of KOS metadata for future machine-based access; a possible core set of metadata elements is proposed. This is dealt with in terms of practical experience and in relation to the Dublin Core Application Profile.

Date

22. 8.2014 17:12:54

0.008195645 = product of:
  0.024586935 = sum of:
    0.010128236 = weight(_text_:in in 3150) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.010128236 = score(doc=3150,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.06484802 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.047673445 = queryNorm
        0.1561842 = fieldWeight in 3150, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=3150)
    0.014458697 = product of:
      0.028917395 = sum of:
        0.028917395 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 3150) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.028917395 = score(doc=3150,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.14420812 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
              0.047673445 = queryNorm
            0.20052543 = fieldWeight in 3150, 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=3150)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.33333334 = coord(2/6)

Abstract

The Functional Requirements for Subject Authority Records (FRSAR) Working Group was formed in 2005 as the third IFLA working group of the FRBR family to address subject authority data issues and to investigate the direct and indirect uses of subject authority data by a wide range of users. This paper introduces the Functional Requirements for Subject Authority Data (FRSAD), the model developed by the FRSAR Working Group, and discusses it in the context of other related conceptual models defined in the specifications during recent years, including the British Standard BS8723-5: Structured vocabularies for information retrieval - Guide Part 5: Exchange formats and protocols for interoperability, W3C's SKOS Simple Knowledge Organization System Reference, and OWL Web Ontology Language Reference. These models enable the consideration of the functions of subject authority data and concept schemes at a higher level that is independent of any implementation, system, or specific context, while allowing us to focus on the semantics, structures, and interoperability of subject authority data.

0.0063960417 = product of:
  0.019188125 = sum of:
    0.009548993 = weight(_text_:in in 3109) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.009548993 = score(doc=3109,freq=12.0), product of:
        0.06484802 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.047673445 = queryNorm
        0.14725187 = fieldWeight in 3109, product of:
          3.4641016 = tf(freq=12.0), with freq of:
            12.0 = termFreq=12.0
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=3109)
    0.009639132 = product of:
      0.019278264 = sum of:
        0.019278264 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 3109) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.019278264 = score(doc=3109,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.14420812 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
              0.047673445 = queryNorm
            0.13368362 = fieldWeight in 3109, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=3109)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.33333334 = coord(2/6)

Abstract

This proposal presents the methodology of indexing with images suggested by De Brito and Caribé (2015). The imagetic model is used as a compatible mechanism with FRSAD for a global information share and use of subject data, both within the library sector and beyond. The conceptual model of imagetic indexing shows how images are related to topics and 'key-images' are interpreted as nomens to implement the FRSAD model. Indexing with images consists of using images instead of key-words or descriptors, to represent and organize information. Implementing the imaged navigation in OPACs denotes multiple advantages derived from this rethinking the OPAC anew, since we are looking forward to sharing concepts within the subject authority data. Images, carrying linguistic objects, permeate inter-social and cultural concepts. In practice it includes translated metadata, symmetrical multilingual thesaurus, or any traditional indexing tools. iOPAC embodies efforts focused on conceptual levels as expected from librarians. Imaged interfaces are more intuitive since users do not need specific training for information retrieval, offering easier comprehension of indexing codes, larger conceptual portability of descriptors (as images), and a better interoperability between discourse codes and indexing competences affecting positively social and cultural interoperability. The imagetic methodology deploys R&D fields for more suitable interfaces taking into consideration users with specific needs such as deafness and illiteracy. This methodology arouse questions about the paradigms of the primacy of orality in information systems and pave the way to a legitimacy of multiple perspectives in document indexing by suggesting a more universal communication system based on images. Interdisciplinarity in neurosciences, linguistics and information sciences would be desirable competencies for further investigations about he nature of cognitive processes in information organization and classification while developing assistive KOS for individuals with communication problems, such autism and deafness.

0.0063134357 = product of:
  0.018940307 = sum of:
    0.0068913912 = weight(_text_:in in 2378) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0068913912 = score(doc=2378,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.06484802 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.047673445 = queryNorm
        0.10626988 = fieldWeight in 2378, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2378)
    0.012048915 = product of:
      0.02409783 = sum of:
        0.02409783 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 2378) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.02409783 = score(doc=2378,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.14420812 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
              0.047673445 = queryNorm
            0.16710453 = fieldWeight in 2378, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2378)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.33333334 = coord(2/6)

Abstract

This article presents one part of a wider study, performed at the Department of library and information science and book studies (LIS & BS) at the University of Ljubljana (UL). The study investigated the perceptions of user friendliness of information-retrieval systems (IRS) and the role of individual characteristics of users in these perceptions. Based on an expert study, a user study with 61 postgraduate students of the UL was performed. Three interfaces of e-journals were studied: Science Direct, Proquest Direct, and Ebsco Host. Questionnaires and observations were used for data collection. The users'perceptions of user friendliness and of importance of auxiliary functions were investigated. Also, the connections between these perceptions and the users'individual characteristics were identified. Three sets of individual characteristics were included: approaches to studying, thinking styles, and hemisphere leanings. In connection with the dimensions of individual characteristics, very different perceptions of user friendliness were expressed. Some dimensions of individual characteristics were also found to be connected to the users'academic areas. It is shown that participants from different academic areas have different requirements and perceptions of user friendliness. The results of the study are relevant for the design of the user interfaces of disciplinary IR systems. They also have implications for other areas, for example, user education and training.

0.0032323494 = product of:
  0.019394096 = sum of:
    0.019394096 = weight(_text_:in in 2881) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.019394096 = score(doc=2881,freq=22.0), product of:
        0.06484802 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.047673445 = queryNorm
        0.29906997 = fieldWeight in 2881, product of:
          4.690416 = tf(freq=22.0), with freq of:
            22.0 = termFreq=22.0
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2881)
  0.16666667 = coord(1/6)

Abstract

The FRBR Review Group worked actively towards a consolidated model starting in 2010, in a series of working meetings held in conjunction with IFLA conferences and at an additional mid-year meeting in April 2012 during which the user task consolidation was first drafted. In 2013 in Singapore, the FRBR Review Group constituted a Consolidation Editorial Group (CEG) to focus on the detailed reassessment of attribute s and relationships, and the drafting of this model document. The CEG (at times with other FRBR Review Group members or invited experts) held five multi-day meetings, as well as discussing progress in detail with the FRBR Review Group as a whole during a working meeting in 2014 in Lyon and another in 2015 in Cape Town.

0.003213044 = product of:
  0.019278264 = sum of:
    0.019278264 = product of:
      0.038556527 = sum of:
        0.038556527 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 1955) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.038556527 = score(doc=1955,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.14420812 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
              0.047673445 = queryNorm
            0.26736724 = fieldWeight in 1955, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=1955)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.16666667 = coord(1/6)

Abstract

FRBR, FRAD, and FRSAD models propose user tasks as a way to address and categorize functions that a catalog should support. The user tasks are not harmonized among these models, but to do that, they should first be fully understood and analyzed, especially "select" and "identify." We decided to look at the FRBR user tasks from the perspective of interactive information retrieval (IIR). Several IIR models were reviewed and Ellis' and Belkin's models were chosen for further analysis and interpretation of FRBR "select" and "identify" tasks.