Search (224 results, page 1 of 12)

  • × theme_ss:"Klassifikationstheorie: Elemente / Struktur"
  1. Buchanan, B.: Bibliothekarische Klassifikationstheorie (1989) 0.06
    0.061921723 = product of:
      0.18576516 = sum of:
        0.12187091 = weight(_text_:indexierung in 3921) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.12187091 = score(doc=3921,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.25638393 = queryWeight, product of:
              5.377919 = idf(docFreq=554, maxDocs=44218)
              0.047673445 = queryNorm
            0.47534537 = fieldWeight in 3921, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              5.377919 = idf(docFreq=554, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=3921)
        0.06389425 = weight(_text_:u in 3921) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.06389425 = score(doc=3921,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.15610404 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.2744443 = idf(docFreq=4547, maxDocs=44218)
              0.047673445 = queryNorm
            0.40930554 = fieldWeight in 3921, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              3.2744443 = idf(docFreq=4547, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=3921)
      0.33333334 = coord(2/6)
    
    Content
    Inhalt: Klassifikation: Definition und Einsatzmöglichkeiten - Die verschiedenen Arten von Klassenbeziehungen - Präkombinierte Klassifikationssysteme und Facettenklassifikationen - Methodische Überlegungen zur Lösung von Ordnungsproblemen - Konstruktion einer Facettenklassifikation, 1. Teil - Konstruktion einer Facettenklassifikation, 2. Teil - Gestaltung des Notationssystems, 1. Teil - Gestaltung des Notationssystems, 2. Teil - Gestaltung des Notationssystems, 3. Teil - Das alphabetische Sachregister - Universalklassifikationen - Kritische Anmerkungen zur systematischen Ordnung - Automatische Indexierung
    Issue
    Übers. von U. Reimer-Böhner.
    Theme
    Grundlagen u. Einführungen: Allgemeine Literatur
  2. Lorenz, B.: Zur Theorie und Terminologie der bibliothekarischen Klassifikation (2018) 0.05
    0.050378427 = product of:
      0.100756854 = sum of:
        0.011026227 = weight(_text_:in in 4339) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.011026227 = score(doc=4339,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.06484802 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
              0.047673445 = queryNorm
            0.17003182 = fieldWeight in 4339, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=4339)
        0.06389425 = weight(_text_:u in 4339) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.06389425 = score(doc=4339,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.15610404 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.2744443 = idf(docFreq=4547, maxDocs=44218)
              0.047673445 = queryNorm
            0.40930554 = fieldWeight in 4339, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              3.2744443 = idf(docFreq=4547, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=4339)
        0.025836375 = product of:
          0.05167275 = sum of:
            0.05167275 = weight(_text_:22 in 4339) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.05167275 = score(doc=4339,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.16694428 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.047673445 = queryNorm
                0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 4339, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=4339)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(3/6)
    
    Abstract
    Der Beitrag skizziert die Grundlagen der Arbeit mit Klassifikationen in Bibliotheken und erläutert die Grundbegriffe der bibliothekarischen Klassifikationstheorie. Schwerpunkte bilden die Ordnungsprinzipien und Strukturierungsmittel von Klassifikationen sowie die verschiedenen Klassifikationstypologien. Dabei werden vorzugsweise Beispiele aus Klassifikationen verwendet, die im deutschen Sprachraum verbreitet sind.
    Pages
    S.1-22
    Source
    Klassifikationen in Bibliotheken: Theorie - Anwendung - Nutzen. Hrsg.: H. Alex, G. Bee u. U. Junger
  3. Advances in classification research. Vol.10 : Proceedings of the 10th ASIS SIG/CR Classification Research Workshop, held at the 62nd ASIS Annual Meeting Nov 1-5, 1999, Washington (2001) 0.05
    0.049248815 = product of:
      0.09849763 = sum of:
        0.00826967 = weight(_text_:in in 1586) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.00826967 = score(doc=1586,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.06484802 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
              0.047673445 = queryNorm
            0.12752387 = fieldWeight in 1586, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1586)
        0.07576926 = weight(_text_:u in 1586) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.07576926 = score(doc=1586,freq=10.0), product of:
            0.15610404 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.2744443 = idf(docFreq=4547, maxDocs=44218)
              0.047673445 = queryNorm
            0.48537666 = fieldWeight in 1586, product of:
              3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
                10.0 = termFreq=10.0
              3.2744443 = idf(docFreq=4547, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1586)
        0.014458697 = product of:
          0.028917395 = sum of:
            0.028917395 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 1586) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.028917395 = score(doc=1586,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.14420812 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.047673445 = queryNorm
                0.20052543 = fieldWeight in 1586, 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=1586)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(3/6)
    
    Content
    Enthält die Beiträge: DAVENPORT, E.: Implicit orders: documentary genres and organizational practice; ANDERSEN, J. u. F.S. CHRISTENSEN: Wittgenstein and indexing theory; OLSON, H.A.: Cultural discourses of classification: indigeous alternatives to the tradition of Aristotle, Dürkheim, and Foucault; FRÂNCU, V.: A universal classification system going through changes; JACOB, E.K. u. U. PRISS: Nontraditional indexing structures for the management of electronic resources; BROOKS, T.A.: Relevance auras: macro patterns and micro scatter; RUIZ, M.E. u. SRINIVASAN, P.: Combining machine learning and hierarchical indexing structures for text categorization; WEEDMAN, J.: Local practice and the growth of knowledge: decisions in subject access to digitized images
    Editor
    Albrechtsen, H. u. J.E. Mai
    Theme
    Klassifikationssysteme im Online-Retrieval
  4. Rescheleit, W.; Menner, L.: Vergleich der Wissensrepräsentationssprache FRL mit Dezimalklassifikation und Facettenklassifikation (1986) 0.04
    0.03762197 = product of:
      0.11286591 = sum of:
        0.09979041 = weight(_text_:umfeld in 1555) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.09979041 = score(doc=1555,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.26788878 = queryWeight, product of:
              5.619245 = idf(docFreq=435, maxDocs=44218)
              0.047673445 = queryNorm
            0.37250686 = fieldWeight in 1555, 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=1555)
        0.013075498 = weight(_text_:in in 1555) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.013075498 = score(doc=1555,freq=10.0), product of:
            0.06484802 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
              0.047673445 = queryNorm
            0.20163295 = fieldWeight in 1555, product of:
              3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
                10.0 = termFreq=10.0
              1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1555)
      0.33333334 = coord(2/6)
    
    Abstract
    Beim Vergleich von Klassifikationen mit Frame-Wissensbasen für Expertensysteme zeigen sich einige elementare Gemeinsamkeiten: Beide haben das Ziel einer geordneten Darstellung von Wissen. Beide bilden dazu Klassen und weisen hierarchische Beziehungen zwischen diesen Klassen auf. Anahnd der Wissensrepräsentationssprache FRL (Frame Representation Language) wird untersucht, inwieweit beide Systeme sich in das jeweils andere übertragen lassen. Die FRL speichert Wissen in einer speziellen Datenstruktur, den Frames, die aus einem Framenamen, der den jeweiligen Begriff bezeichnet, und Slots, die die Eigenschaften des Begriffs enthalten, bestehen. Eine effektive Speicherung des Wissens wird dadurch erreicht, daß die Frames in einer polyhierarchischen Struktur geordnet sind und in generischer Relation zueinander stehen müssen. Über die generische Relation lassen sich die Eigenschaften höherer Begriffe auf ihre Subklassen vererben. Es werden die Ergebnisse eines Versuchs dargestellt, Elemente bestehender Universalklassifikationen (DK, BC2) in die FRL zu übertragen
    Source
    Die Klassifikation und ihr Umfeld: Proc. 10. Jahrestagung der Gesellschaft für Klassifikation, Münster, 18.-21.6.1986. Hrsg.: P.O. Degens
  5. Hjoerland, B.: Theories of knowledge organization - theories of knowledge (2017) 0.03
    0.03448075 = product of:
      0.0689615 = sum of:
        0.0068221292 = weight(_text_:in in 3494) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.0068221292 = score(doc=3494,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.06484802 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
              0.047673445 = queryNorm
            0.10520181 = fieldWeight in 3494, 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=3494)
        0.03953255 = weight(_text_:u in 3494) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.03953255 = score(doc=3494,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.15610404 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.2744443 = idf(docFreq=4547, maxDocs=44218)
              0.047673445 = queryNorm
            0.25324488 = fieldWeight in 3494, 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=3494)
        0.022606827 = product of:
          0.045213655 = sum of:
            0.045213655 = weight(_text_:22 in 3494) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.045213655 = score(doc=3494,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.16694428 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.047673445 = queryNorm
                0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 3494, 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=3494)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(3/6)
    
    Pages
    S.22-36
    Series
    Fortschritte in der Wissensorganisation; Bd.13
    Source
    Theorie, Semantik und Organisation von Wissen: Proceedings der 13. Tagung der Deutschen Sektion der Internationalen Gesellschaft für Wissensorganisation (ISKO) und dem 13. Internationalen Symposium der Informationswissenschaft der Higher Education Association for Information Science (HI) Potsdam (19.-20.03.2013): 'Theory, Information and Organization of Knowledge' / Proceedings der 14. Tagung der Deutschen Sektion der Internationalen Gesellschaft für Wissensorganisation (ISKO) und Natural Language & Information Systems (NLDB) Passau (16.06.2015): 'Lexical Resources for Knowledge Organization' / Proceedings des Workshops der Deutschen Sektion der Internationalen Gesellschaft für Wissensorganisation (ISKO) auf der SEMANTICS Leipzig (1.09.2014): 'Knowledge Organization and Semantic Web' / Proceedings des Workshops der Polnischen und Deutschen Sektion der Internationalen Gesellschaft für Wissensorganisation (ISKO) Cottbus (29.-30.09.2011): 'Economics of Knowledge Production and Organization'. Hrsg. von W. Babik, H.P. Ohly u. K. Weber
  6. Classification research for knowledge representation and organization : Proc. of the 5th Int. Study Conf. on Classification Research, Toronto, Canada, 24.-28.6.1991 (1992) 0.03
    0.033397183 = product of:
      0.066794366 = sum of:
        0.012744417 = weight(_text_:in in 2072) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.012744417 = score(doc=2072,freq=38.0), product of:
            0.06484802 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
              0.047673445 = queryNorm
            0.19652747 = fieldWeight in 2072, product of:
              6.164414 = tf(freq=38.0), with freq of:
                38.0 = termFreq=38.0
              1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0234375 = fieldNorm(doc=2072)
        0.03788463 = weight(_text_:u in 2072) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.03788463 = score(doc=2072,freq=10.0), product of:
            0.15610404 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.2744443 = idf(docFreq=4547, maxDocs=44218)
              0.047673445 = queryNorm
            0.24268833 = fieldWeight in 2072, product of:
              3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
                10.0 = termFreq=10.0
              3.2744443 = idf(docFreq=4547, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0234375 = fieldNorm(doc=2072)
        0.016165316 = product of:
          0.032330632 = sum of:
            0.032330632 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 2072) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.032330632 = score(doc=2072,freq=10.0), product of:
                0.14420812 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.047673445 = queryNorm
                0.22419426 = fieldWeight in 2072, product of:
                  3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
                    10.0 = termFreq=10.0
                  3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0234375 = fieldNorm(doc=2072)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(3/6)
    
    Abstract
    This volume deals with both theoretical and empirical research in classification and encompasses universal classification systems, special classification systems, thesauri and the place of classification in a broad spectrum of document and information systems. Papers fall into one or three major areas as follows: 1) general principles and policies 2) structure and logic in classification; and empirical investigation; classification in the design of various types of document/information systems. The papers originate from the ISCCR '91 conference and have been selected according to the following criteria: relevance to the conference theme; importance of the topic in the representation and organization of knowledge; quality; and originality in terms of potential contribution to research and new knowledge.
    Content
    Enthält die Beiträge: SVENONIUS, E.: Classification: prospects, problems, and possibilities; BEALL, J.: Editing the Dewey Decimal Classification online: the evolution of the DDC database; BEGHTOL, C.: Toward a theory of fiction analysis for information storage and retrieval; CRAVEN, T.C.: Concept relation structures and their graphic display; FUGMANN, R.: Illusory goals in information science research; GILCHRIST, A.: UDC: the 1990's and beyond; GREEN, R.: The expression of syntagmatic relationships in indexing: are frame-based index languages the answer?; HUMPHREY, S.M.: Use and management of classification systems for knowledge-based indexing; MIKSA, F.L.: The concept of the universe of knowledge and the purpose of LIS classification; SCOTT, M. u. A.F. FONSECA: Methodology for functional appraisal of records and creation of a functional thesaurus; ALBRECHTSEN, H.: PRESS: a thesaurus-based information system for software reuse; AMAESHI, B.: A preliminary AAT compatible African art thesaurus; CHATTERJEE, A.: Structures of Indian classification systems of the pre-Ranganathan era and their impact on the Colon Classification; COCHRANE, P.A.: Indexing and searching thesauri, the Janus or Proteus of information retrieval; CRAVEN, T.C.: A general versus a special algorithm in the graphic display of thesauri; DAHLBERG, I.: The basis of a new universal classification system seen from a philosophy of science point of view: DRABENSTOTT, K.M., RIESTER, L.C. u. B.A.DEDE: Shelflisting using expert systems; FIDEL, R.: Thesaurus requirements for an intermediary expert system; GREEN, R.: Insights into classification from the cognitive sciences: ramifications for index languages; GROLIER, E. de: Towards a syndetic information retrieval system; GUENTHER, R.: The USMARC format for classification data: development and implementation; HOWARTH, L.C.: Factors influencing policies for the adoption and integration of revisions to classification schedules; HUDON, M.: Term definitions in subject thesauri: the Canadian literacy thesaurus experience; HUSAIN, S.: Notational techniques for the accomodation of subjects in Colon Classification 7th edition: theoretical possibility vis-à-vis practical need; KWASNIK, B.H. u. C. JORGERSEN: The exploration by means of repertory grids of semantic differences among names of official documents; MICCO, M.: Suggestions for automating the Library of Congress Classification schedules; PERREAULT, J.M.: An essay on the prehistory of general categories (II): G.W. Leibniz, Conrad Gesner; REES-POTTER, L.K.: How well do thesauri serve the social sciences?; REVIE, C.W. u. G. SMART: The construction and the use of faceted classification schema in technical domains; ROCKMORE, M.: Structuring a flexible faceted thsaurus record for corporate information retrieval; ROULIN, C.: Sub-thesauri as part of a metathesaurus; SMITH, L.C.: UNISIST revisited: compatibility in the context of collaboratories; STILES, W.G.: Notes concerning the use chain indexing as a possible means of simulating the inductive leap within artificial intelligence; SVENONIUS, E., LIU, S. u. B. SUBRAHMANYAM: Automation in chain indexing; TURNER, J.: Structure in data in the Stockshot database at the National Film Board of Canada; VIZINE-GOETZ, D.: The Dewey Decimal Classification as an online classification tool; WILLIAMSON, N.J.: Restructuring UDC: problems and possibilies; WILSON, A.: The hierarchy of belief: ideological tendentiousness in universal classification; WILSON, B.F.: An evaluation of the systematic botany schedule of the Universal Decimal Classification (English full edition, 1979); ZENG, L.: Research and development of classification and thesauri in China; CONFERENCE SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS
    Footnote
    Rez. in: International classification 19(1992) no.4, S.228-229 (B.C. Vickery); Journal of classification 11(1994) no.2, S.255-256 (W. Gödert)
    Theme
    Klassifikationssysteme im Online-Retrieval
  7. Gödert, W.: Strukturierung von Klassifikationssystemen und Online-Retrieval (1995) 0.03
    0.03018485 = product of:
      0.09055455 = sum of:
        0.056475073 = weight(_text_:u in 922) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.056475073 = score(doc=922,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.15610404 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.2744443 = idf(docFreq=4547, maxDocs=44218)
              0.047673445 = queryNorm
            0.3617784 = fieldWeight in 922, 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=922)
        0.034079477 = product of:
          0.068158954 = sum of:
            0.068158954 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 922) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.068158954 = score(doc=922,freq=4.0), product of:
                0.14420812 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.047673445 = queryNorm
                0.47264296 = fieldWeight in 922, product of:
                  2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                    4.0 = termFreq=4.0
                  3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=922)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.33333334 = coord(2/6)
    
    Source
    Aufbau und Erschließung begrifflicher Datenbanken: Beiträge zur bibliothekarischen Klassifikation. Eine Auswahl von Vorträgen der Jahrestagungen 1993 (Kaiserslautern) und 1994 (Oldenburg) der Gesellschaft für Klassifikation. Hrsg.: H. Havekost u. H.-J. Wätjen
    Theme
    Klassifikationssysteme im Online-Retrieval
  8. Green, R.: Relational aspects of subject authority control : the contributions of classificatory structure (2015) 0.03
    0.029084027 = product of:
      0.058168054 = sum of:
        0.0137827825 = weight(_text_:in in 2282) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.0137827825 = score(doc=2282,freq=16.0), product of:
            0.06484802 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
              0.047673445 = queryNorm
            0.21253976 = fieldWeight in 2282, product of:
              4.0 = tf(freq=16.0), with freq of:
                16.0 = termFreq=16.0
              1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2282)
        0.028237537 = weight(_text_:u in 2282) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.028237537 = score(doc=2282,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.15610404 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.2744443 = idf(docFreq=4547, maxDocs=44218)
              0.047673445 = queryNorm
            0.1808892 = fieldWeight in 2282, 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=2282)
        0.016147735 = product of:
          0.03229547 = sum of:
            0.03229547 = weight(_text_:22 in 2282) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.03229547 = score(doc=2282,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.16694428 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.047673445 = queryNorm
                0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 2282, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2282)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(3/6)
    
    Abstract
    The structure of a classification system contributes in a variety of ways to representing semantic relationships between its topics in the context of subject authority control. We explore this claim using the Dewey Decimal Classification (DDC) system as a case study. The DDC links its classes into a notational hierarchy, supplemented by a network of relationships between topics, expressed in class descriptions and in the Relative Index (RI). Topics/subjects are expressed both by the natural language text of the caption and notes (including Manual notes) in a class description and by the controlled vocabulary of the RI's alphabetic index, which shows where topics are treated in the classificatory structure. The expression of relationships between topics depends on paradigmatic and syntagmatic relationships between natural language terms in captions, notes, and RI terms; on the meaning of specific note types; and on references recorded between RI terms. The specific means used in the DDC for capturing hierarchical (including disciplinary), equivalence and associative relationships are surveyed.
    Date
    8.11.2015 21:27:22
    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
  9. Smiraglia, R.P.: ¬A brief introduction to facets in knowledge organization (2017) 0.03
    0.02648839 = product of:
      0.079465166 = sum of:
        0.011695079 = weight(_text_:in in 1131) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.011695079 = score(doc=1131,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.06484802 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
              0.047673445 = queryNorm
            0.18034597 = fieldWeight in 1131, 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=1131)
        0.067770086 = weight(_text_:u in 1131) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.067770086 = score(doc=1131,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.15610404 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.2744443 = idf(docFreq=4547, maxDocs=44218)
              0.047673445 = queryNorm
            0.43413407 = fieldWeight in 1131, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.2744443 = idf(docFreq=4547, maxDocs=44218)
              0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=1131)
      0.33333334 = coord(2/6)
    
    Source
    Dimensions of knowledge: facets for knowledge organization. Eds.: R.P. Smiraglia, u. H.-L. Lee
  10. Ranganathan, S.R.; Gopinath, M.A.: Prolegomena to library classification (1967) 0.03
    0.02648839 = product of:
      0.079465166 = sum of:
        0.011695079 = weight(_text_:in in 672) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.011695079 = score(doc=672,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.06484802 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
              0.047673445 = queryNorm
            0.18034597 = fieldWeight in 672, 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=672)
        0.067770086 = weight(_text_:u in 672) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.067770086 = score(doc=672,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.15610404 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.2744443 = idf(docFreq=4547, maxDocs=44218)
              0.047673445 = queryNorm
            0.43413407 = fieldWeight in 672, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.2744443 = idf(docFreq=4547, maxDocs=44218)
              0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=672)
      0.33333334 = coord(2/6)
    
    Series
    Ranganathan series in library science; 20
    Theme
    Grundlagen u. Einführungen: Allgemeine Literatur
  11. Smiraglia, R.P.: Facets for clustering and disambiguation : the domain discourse of facets in knowledge organization (2017) 0.03
    0.02648839 = product of:
      0.079465166 = sum of:
        0.011695079 = weight(_text_:in in 4153) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.011695079 = score(doc=4153,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.06484802 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
              0.047673445 = queryNorm
            0.18034597 = fieldWeight in 4153, 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=4153)
        0.067770086 = weight(_text_:u in 4153) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.067770086 = score(doc=4153,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.15610404 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.2744443 = idf(docFreq=4547, maxDocs=44218)
              0.047673445 = queryNorm
            0.43413407 = fieldWeight in 4153, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.2744443 = idf(docFreq=4547, maxDocs=44218)
              0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=4153)
      0.33333334 = coord(2/6)
    
    Source
    Dimensions of knowledge: facets for knowledge organization. Eds.: R.P. Smiraglia, u. H.-L. Lee
  12. Jacob, E.K.: Proposal for a classification of classifications built on Beghtol's distinction between "Naïve Classification" and "Professional Classification" (2010) 0.03
    0.026455678 = product of:
      0.079367034 = sum of:
        0.011695079 = weight(_text_:in in 2945) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.011695079 = score(doc=2945,freq=8.0), product of:
            0.06484802 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
              0.047673445 = queryNorm
            0.18034597 = fieldWeight in 2945, product of:
              2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
                8.0 = termFreq=8.0
              1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2945)
        0.067671955 = sum of:
          0.028917395 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 2945) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
            0.028917395 = score(doc=2945,freq=2.0), product of:
              0.14420812 = queryWeight, product of:
                3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
                0.047673445 = queryNorm
              0.20052543 = fieldWeight in 2945, 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=2945)
          0.03875456 = weight(_text_:22 in 2945) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
            0.03875456 = score(doc=2945,freq=2.0), product of:
              0.16694428 = queryWeight, product of:
                3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                0.047673445 = queryNorm
              0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 2945, 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=2945)
      0.33333334 = coord(2/6)
    
    Abstract
    Argues that Beghtol's (2003) use of the terms "naive classification" and "professional classification" is valid because they are nominal definitions and that the distinction between these two types of classification points up the need for researchers in knowledge organization to broaden their scope beyond traditional classification systems intended for information retrieval. Argues that work by Beghtol (2003), Kwasnik (1999) and Bailey (1994) offer direction for the development of a classification of classifications based on the pragmatic dimensions of extant classification systems. Bezugnahme auf: Beghtol, C.: Naïve classification systems and the global information society. In: Knowledge organization and the global information society: Proceedings of the 8th International ISKO Conference 13-16 July 2004, London, UK. Ed.: I.C. McIlwaine. Würzburg: Ergon Verlag 2004. S.19-22. (Advances in knowledge organization; vol.9)
    Content
    Beitrag in einem Special issue: A Festschrift for Clare Beghtol
  13. Beghtol, C.: Naïve classification systems and the global information society (2004) 0.03
    0.02642252 = product of:
      0.079267554 = sum of:
        0.012892614 = weight(_text_:in in 3483) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.012892614 = score(doc=3483,freq=14.0), product of:
            0.06484802 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
              0.047673445 = queryNorm
            0.19881277 = fieldWeight in 3483, product of:
              3.7416575 = tf(freq=14.0), with freq of:
                14.0 = termFreq=14.0
              1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3483)
        0.06637494 = sum of:
          0.034079477 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 3483) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
            0.034079477 = score(doc=3483,freq=4.0), product of:
              0.14420812 = queryWeight, product of:
                3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
                0.047673445 = queryNorm
              0.23632148 = fieldWeight in 3483, 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=3483)
          0.03229547 = weight(_text_:22 in 3483) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
            0.03229547 = score(doc=3483,freq=2.0), product of:
              0.16694428 = queryWeight, product of:
                3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                0.047673445 = queryNorm
              0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 3483, product of:
                1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                  2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3483)
      0.33333334 = coord(2/6)
    
    Abstract
    Classification is an activity that transcends time and space and that bridges the divisions between different languages and cultures, including the divisions between academic disciplines. Classificatory activity, however, serves different purposes in different situations. Classifications for infonnation retrieval can be called "professional" classifications and classifications in other fields can be called "naïve" classifications because they are developed by people who have no particular interest in classificatory issues. The general purpose of naïve classification systems is to discover new knowledge. In contrast, the general purpose of information retrieval classifications is to classify pre-existing knowledge. Different classificatory purposes may thus inform systems that are intended to span the cultural specifics of the globalized information society. This paper builds an previous research into the purposes and characteristics of naïve classifications. It describes some of the relationships between the purpose and context of a naive classification, the units of analysis used in it, and the theory that the context and the units of analysis imply.
    Footnote
    Vgl.: Jacob, E.K.: Proposal for a classification of classifications built on Beghtol's distinction between "Naïve Classification" and "Professional Classification". In: Knowledge organization. 37(2010) no.2, S.111-120.
    Pages
    S.19-22
    Series
    Advances in knowledge organization; vol.9
  14. Slavic, A.: On the nature and typology of documentary classifications and their use in a networked environment (2007) 0.03
    0.025933398 = product of:
      0.07780019 = sum of:
        0.010128236 = weight(_text_:in in 780) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.010128236 = score(doc=780,freq=6.0), product of:
            0.06484802 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
              0.047673445 = queryNorm
            0.1561842 = fieldWeight in 780, 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=780)
        0.067671955 = sum of:
          0.028917395 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 780) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
            0.028917395 = score(doc=780,freq=2.0), product of:
              0.14420812 = queryWeight, product of:
                3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
                0.047673445 = queryNorm
              0.20052543 = fieldWeight in 780, 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=780)
          0.03875456 = weight(_text_:22 in 780) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
            0.03875456 = score(doc=780,freq=2.0), product of:
              0.16694428 = queryWeight, product of:
                3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                0.047673445 = queryNorm
              0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 780, 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=780)
      0.33333334 = coord(2/6)
    
    Abstract
    Networked orientated standards for vocabulary publishing and exchange and proposals for terminological services and terminology registries will improve sharing and use of all knowledge organization systems in the networked information environment. This means that documentary classifications may also become more applicable for use outside their original domain of application. The paper summarises some characteristics common to documentary classifications and explains some terminological, functional and implementation aspects. The original purpose behind each classification scheme determines the functions that the vocabulary is designed to facilitate. These functions influence the structure, semantics and syntax, scheme coverage and format in which classification data are published and made available. The author suggests that attention should be paid to the differences between documentary classifications as these may determine their suitability for a certain purpose and may impose different requirements with respect to their use online. As we speak, many classifications are being created for knowledge organization and it may be important to promote expertise from the bibliographic domain with respect to building and using classification systems.
    Date
    22.12.2007 17:22:31
    Theme
    Klassifikationssysteme im Online-Retrieval
  15. Kwasnik, B.H.: ¬The role of classification in knowledge representation (1999) 0.02
    0.024506498 = product of:
      0.07351949 = sum of:
        0.0058475393 = weight(_text_:in in 2464) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.0058475393 = score(doc=2464,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.06484802 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
              0.047673445 = queryNorm
            0.09017298 = fieldWeight in 2464, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2464)
        0.067671955 = sum of:
          0.028917395 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 2464) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
            0.028917395 = score(doc=2464,freq=2.0), product of:
              0.14420812 = queryWeight, product of:
                3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
                0.047673445 = queryNorm
              0.20052543 = fieldWeight in 2464, 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=2464)
          0.03875456 = weight(_text_:22 in 2464) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
            0.03875456 = score(doc=2464,freq=2.0), product of:
              0.16694428 = queryWeight, product of:
                3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                0.047673445 = queryNorm
              0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 2464, 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=2464)
      0.33333334 = coord(2/6)
    
    Source
    Library trends. 48(1999) no.1, S.22-47
    Theme
    Klassifikationssysteme im Online-Retrieval
  16. Dousa, T.M.: Categories and the architectonics of system in Julius Otto Kaiser's method of systematic indexing (2014) 0.02
    0.023934308 = product of:
      0.07180292 = sum of:
        0.015409621 = weight(_text_:in in 1418) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.015409621 = score(doc=1418,freq=20.0), product of:
            0.06484802 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
              0.047673445 = queryNorm
            0.2376267 = fieldWeight in 1418, product of:
              4.472136 = tf(freq=20.0), with freq of:
                20.0 = termFreq=20.0
              1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1418)
        0.0563933 = sum of:
          0.02409783 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 1418) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
            0.02409783 = score(doc=1418,freq=2.0), product of:
              0.14420812 = queryWeight, product of:
                3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
                0.047673445 = queryNorm
              0.16710453 = fieldWeight in 1418, 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=1418)
          0.03229547 = weight(_text_:22 in 1418) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
            0.03229547 = score(doc=1418,freq=2.0), product of:
              0.16694428 = queryWeight, product of:
                3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                0.047673445 = queryNorm
              0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 1418, product of:
                1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                  2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1418)
      0.33333334 = coord(2/6)
    
    Abstract
    Categories, or concepts of high generality representing the most basic kinds of entities in the world, have long been understood to be a fundamental element in the construction of knowledge organization systems (KOSs), particularly faceted ones. Commentators on facet analysis have tended to foreground the role of categories in the structuring of controlled vocabularies and the construction of compound index terms, and the implications of this for subject representation and information retrieval. Less attention has been paid to the variety of ways in which categories can shape the overall architectonic framework of a KOS. This case study explores the range of functions that categories took in structuring various aspects of an early analytico-synthetic KOS, Julius Otto Kaiser's method of Systematic Indexing (SI). Within SI, categories not only functioned as mechanisms to partition an index vocabulary into smaller groupings of terms and as elements in the construction of compound index terms but also served as means of defining the units of indexing, or index items, incorporated into an index; determining the organization of card index files and the articulation of the guide card system serving as a navigational aids thereto; and setting structural constraints to the establishment of cross-references between terms. In all these ways, Kaiser's system of categories contributed to the general systematicity of SI.
    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
  17. Zhang, J.; Zeng, M.L.: ¬A new similarity measure for subject hierarchical structures (2014) 0.02
    0.023095306 = product of:
      0.069285914 = sum of:
        0.012892614 = weight(_text_:in in 1778) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.012892614 = score(doc=1778,freq=14.0), product of:
            0.06484802 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
              0.047673445 = queryNorm
            0.19881277 = fieldWeight in 1778, product of:
              3.7416575 = tf(freq=14.0), with freq of:
                14.0 = termFreq=14.0
              1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1778)
        0.0563933 = sum of:
          0.02409783 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 1778) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
            0.02409783 = score(doc=1778,freq=2.0), product of:
              0.14420812 = queryWeight, product of:
                3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
                0.047673445 = queryNorm
              0.16710453 = fieldWeight in 1778, 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=1778)
          0.03229547 = weight(_text_:22 in 1778) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
            0.03229547 = score(doc=1778,freq=2.0), product of:
              0.16694428 = queryWeight, product of:
                3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                0.047673445 = queryNorm
              0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 1778, product of:
                1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                  2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1778)
      0.33333334 = coord(2/6)
    
    Abstract
    Purpose - The purpose of this paper is to introduce a new similarity method to gauge the differences between two subject hierarchical structures. Design/methodology/approach - In the proposed similarity measure, nodes on two hierarchical structures are projected onto a two-dimensional space, respectively, and both structural similarity and subject similarity of nodes are considered in the similarity between the two hierarchical structures. The extent to which the structural similarity impacts on the similarity can be controlled by adjusting a parameter. An experiment was conducted to evaluate soundness of the measure. Eight experts whose research interests were information retrieval and information organization participated in the study. Results from the new measure were compared with results from the experts. Findings - The evaluation shows strong correlations between the results from the new method and the results from the experts. It suggests that the similarity method achieved satisfactory results. Practical implications - Hierarchical structures that are found in subject directories, taxonomies, classification systems, and other classificatory structures play an extremely important role in information organization and information representation. Measuring the similarity between two subject hierarchical structures allows an accurate overarching understanding of the degree to which the two hierarchical structures are similar. Originality/value - Both structural similarity and subject similarity of nodes were considered in the proposed similarity method, and the extent to which the structural similarity impacts on the similarity can be adjusted. In addition, a new evaluation method for a hierarchical structure similarity was presented.
    Date
    8. 4.2015 16:22:13
  18. Triska, R.: Artificial intelligence, classification theory and the uncertainty reduction process (2007) 0.02
    0.022073656 = product of:
      0.06622097 = sum of:
        0.0097459 = weight(_text_:in in 1139) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.0097459 = score(doc=1139,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.06484802 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
              0.047673445 = queryNorm
            0.15028831 = fieldWeight in 1139, 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=1139)
        0.056475073 = weight(_text_:u in 1139) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.056475073 = score(doc=1139,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.15610404 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.2744443 = idf(docFreq=4547, maxDocs=44218)
              0.047673445 = queryNorm
            0.3617784 = fieldWeight in 1139, 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=1139)
      0.33333334 = coord(2/6)
    
    Source
    ¬La interdisciplinariedad y la transdisciplinariedad en la organización del conocimiento científico : actas del VIII Congreso ISKO-España, León, 18, 19 y 20 de Abril de 2007 : Interdisciplinarity and transdisciplinarity in the organization of scientific knowledge. Ed.: B. Rodriguez Bravo u. M.L Alvite Diez
  19. Broughton, V.: Essential classification (2015) 0.02
    0.022073656 = product of:
      0.06622097 = sum of:
        0.0097459 = weight(_text_:in in 2098) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.0097459 = score(doc=2098,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.06484802 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
              0.047673445 = queryNorm
            0.15028831 = fieldWeight in 2098, 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=2098)
        0.056475073 = weight(_text_:u in 2098) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.056475073 = score(doc=2098,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.15610404 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.2744443 = idf(docFreq=4547, maxDocs=44218)
              0.047673445 = queryNorm
            0.3617784 = fieldWeight in 2098, 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=2098)
      0.33333334 = coord(2/6)
    
    Footnote
    Weitere Rez. in: CCQ 54(2016) no.8, S.612-613 (Bobby Bothmann).
    Theme
    Grundlagen u. Einführungen: Allgemeine Literatur
  20. Qin, J.: Evolving paradigms of knowledge representation and organization : a comparative study of classification, XML/DTD and ontology (2003) 0.02
    0.020395996 = product of:
      0.061187986 = sum of:
        0.01607335 = weight(_text_:in in 2763) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.01607335 = score(doc=2763,freq=34.0), product of:
            0.06484802 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
              0.047673445 = queryNorm
            0.24786183 = fieldWeight in 2763, product of:
              5.8309517 = tf(freq=34.0), with freq of:
                34.0 = termFreq=34.0
              1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=2763)
        0.045114636 = sum of:
          0.019278264 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 2763) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
            0.019278264 = score(doc=2763,freq=2.0), product of:
              0.14420812 = queryWeight, product of:
                3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
                0.047673445 = queryNorm
              0.13368362 = fieldWeight in 2763, 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=2763)
          0.025836375 = weight(_text_:22 in 2763) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
            0.025836375 = score(doc=2763,freq=2.0), product of:
              0.16694428 = queryWeight, product of:
                3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                0.047673445 = queryNorm
              0.15476047 = fieldWeight in 2763, 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=2763)
      0.33333334 = coord(2/6)
    
    Abstract
    The different points of views an knowledge representation and organization from various research communities reflect underlying philosophies and paradigms in these communities. This paper reviews differences and relations in knowledge representation and organization and generalizes four paradigms-integrative and disintegrative pragmatism and integrative and disintegrative epistemologism. Examples such as classification, XML schemas, and ontologies are compared based an how they specify concepts, build data models, and encode knowledge organization structures. 1. Introduction Knowledge representation (KR) is a term that several research communities use to refer to somewhat different aspects of the same research area. The artificial intelligence (AI) community considers KR as simply "something to do with writing down, in some language or communications medium, descriptions or pictures that correspond in some salient way to the world or a state of the world" (Duce & Ringland, 1988, p. 3). It emphasizes the ways in which knowledge can be encoded in a computer program (Bench-Capon, 1990). For the library and information science (LIS) community, KR is literally the synonym of knowledge organization, i.e., KR is referred to as the process of organizing knowledge into classifications, thesauri, or subject heading lists. KR has another meaning in LIS: it "encompasses every type and method of indexing, abstracting, cataloguing, classification, records management, bibliography and the creation of textual or bibliographic databases for information retrieval" (Anderson, 1996, p. 336). Adding the social dimension to knowledge organization, Hjoerland (1997) states that knowledge is a part of human activities and tied to the division of labor in society, which should be the primary organization of knowledge. Knowledge organization in LIS is secondary or derived, because knowledge is organized in learned institutions and publications. These different points of views an KR suggest that an essential difference in the understanding of KR between both AI and LIS lies in the source of representationwhether KR targets human activities or derivatives (knowledge produced) from human activities. This difference also decides their difference in purpose-in AI KR is mainly computer-application oriented or pragmatic and the result of representation is used to support decisions an human activities, while in LIS KR is conceptually oriented or abstract and the result of representation is used for access to derivatives from human activities.
    Date
    12. 9.2004 17:22:35
    Series
    Advances in knowledge organization; vol.8
    Source
    Challenges in knowledge representation and organization for the 21st century: Integration of knowledge across boundaries. Proceedings of the 7th ISKO International Conference Granada, Spain, July 10-13, 2002. Ed.: M. López-Huertas

Authors

Languages

Types

  • a 194
  • m 24
  • el 9
  • s 4
  • b 1
  • n 1
  • More… Less…