Search (331 results, page 1 of 17)

0.13151509 = product of:
  0.26303017 = sum of:
    0.21167752 = weight(_text_:java in 1761) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.21167752 = score(doc=1761,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.4805728 = queryWeight, product of:
          7.0475073 = idf(docFreq=104, maxDocs=44421)
          0.06819046 = queryNorm
        0.4404692 = fieldWeight in 1761, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          7.0475073 = idf(docFreq=104, maxDocs=44421)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=1761)
    0.051352646 = weight(_text_:und in 1761) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.051352646 = score(doc=1761,freq=24.0), product of:
        0.15123956 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.217899 = idf(docFreq=13141, maxDocs=44421)
          0.06819046 = queryNorm
        0.33954507 = fieldWeight in 1761, product of:
          4.8989797 = tf(freq=24.0), with freq of:
            24.0 = termFreq=24.0
          2.217899 = idf(docFreq=13141, maxDocs=44421)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=1761)
  0.5 = coord(2/4)

Abstract

Google und Konsorten haben das Suchverhalten unserer Nutzer grundlegend verändert. Erwartet wird eine Suche, die einfach, unkompliziert und übersichtlich sein soll. Längst haben Bibliotheken und Anbieter von Bibliothekssystemen darauf reagiert und die Suchoberflächen entschlackt. Trotzdem sehen viele Bibliothekskataloge nach wie vor wie "Bibliothekskataloge" aus. Letztlich versuchen viele der Suchmasken immer noch die Vielfalt der erfassten Metadaten und die daraus resultierenden differenzierten Suchmöglichkeiten den Nutzern auf den ersten Blick nahe zu bringen. Das geht, was zahlreiche Studien belegen, häufig an den Bedürfnissen der Nutzer vorbei: Diese wünschen sich einen einfachen und schnellen Zugriff auf die für sie relevante Information. Bibliothekskataloge sind längst nicht mehr nur Bestandsverzeichnisse, sondern Zugangssysteme zur Vielfalt der von der Bibliothek vermittelten Informationen. Auch hier bieten Systemhäuser inzwischen Lösungen an, bei denen im Sinn einer verteilten Suche weitere Quellen mit einbezogen werden können. Im Folgenden soll der Lösungsweg vorgestellt werden, den die Bibliothek des Wissenschaftsparks Albert Einstein in Zusammenarbeit mit dem Kooperativen Bibliotheksverbund Berlin-Brandenburg (KOBV) eingeschlagen hat, um mit diesen beiden veränderten Grundvoraussetzungen für ihr Serviceangebot umzugehen. Die Bibliothek des Wissenschaftsparks Albert Einstein - eine gemeinsame Bibliothek des GeoForschungsZentrums Potsdam, der Forschungsstelle Potsdam des Alfred Wegener Instituts für Polar- und Meeresforschung (zwei Helmholtz-Zentren) und des Potsdam-Instituts für Klimafolgenforschung (ein Leibniz-Institut) - ist eine Spezialbibliothek mit dem thematischen Schwerpunkt Geowissenschaften auf dem größten Campus der außeruniversitären Forschung in Brandenburg, dem Wissenschaftspark Albert Einstein auf dem Telegrafenberg in Potsdam.
Der KOBV setzt bereits seit 2005 Suchmaschinentechnologie in verschiedenen Entwicklungsprojekten erfolgreich ein. Zusammen mit der Bibliothek des Wissenschaftsparks Albert Einstein wurde nun der Prototyp einer "Bibliothekssuchmaschine" auf Basis erprobter Open-Source-Technologien aus dem Java-Umfeld (wie Tomcat, Jakarta-Commons, Log4J usw.) als web-basierte Anwendung realisiert, deren Suchmaschinenkern auf der ebenfalls als freie Open-Source Java-Variante erhältlichen Search-Engine-Library Lucene4 basiert. Die erste Version der Bibliothekssuchmaschine läuft seit Ende Oktober im Echtbetrieb. Ziel des Pilotprojektes war die Konzeptionierung, Spezifikation und Implementierung einer neuen, benutzerfreundlichen Suchoberfläche zum schnellen Auffinden fachwissenschaftlich relevanter Daten und Informationen, sowohl in bibliothekseigenen Beständen als auch in zusätzlichen Quellen. Vor dem spezifischen Hintergrund der Spezialbibliothek werden dabei nicht nur Kataloginhalte google-like findbar gemacht, sondern der Suchraum "Katalog" um weitere für die Informationsvermittlung auf dem Campus relevante und spezifische fachwissenschaftliche Inhalte als zusätzliche Suchräume erschlossen. Die neue Anwendung dient dem schnellen Ersteinstieg und leitet die Nutzer dann an die jeweiligen Quellen weiter.

0.112258956 = product of:
  0.44903582 = sum of:
    0.44903582 = weight(_text_:java in 2137) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.44903582 = score(doc=2137,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.4805728 = queryWeight, product of:
          7.0475073 = idf(docFreq=104, maxDocs=44421)
          0.06819046 = queryNorm
        0.9343763 = fieldWeight in 2137, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          7.0475073 = idf(docFreq=104, maxDocs=44421)
          0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=2137)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

0.08273877 = product of:
  0.16547754 = sum of:
    0.112258956 = weight(_text_:java in 2558) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.112258956 = score(doc=2558,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.4805728 = queryWeight, product of:
          7.0475073 = idf(docFreq=104, maxDocs=44421)
          0.06819046 = queryNorm
        0.23359407 = fieldWeight in 2558, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          7.0475073 = idf(docFreq=104, maxDocs=44421)
          0.0234375 = fieldNorm(doc=2558)
    0.053218585 = weight(_text_:headings in 2558) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.053218585 = score(doc=2558,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.3308875 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.8524013 = idf(docFreq=942, maxDocs=44421)
          0.06819046 = queryNorm
        0.16083589 = fieldWeight in 2558, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          4.8524013 = idf(docFreq=942, maxDocs=44421)
          0.0234375 = fieldNorm(doc=2558)
  0.5 = coord(2/4)

Content

"MOST INTEGRATED library systems, as they are currently configured and used, should be removed from public view. Before I say why, let me be clean that I think the integrated library system serves a very important, albeit limited, role. An integrated library system should serve as a key piece of the infrastructure of a library, handling such tasks as ma terials acquisition, cataloging (including holdings, of course), and circulation. The integrated library system should be a complete and accurate recording of a local library's holdings. It should not be presented to users as the primary system for locating information. It fails badly at that important job. - Lack of content- The central problem of almost any library catalog system is that it typically includes only information about the books and journals held by a parficular library. Most do not provide access to joumal article indexes, web search engines, or even selective web directories like the Librarians' Index to the Internet. If they do offen such access, it is only via links to these services. The library catalog is far from onestop shopping for information. Although we acknowledge that fact to each other, we still treat it as if it were the best place in the universe to begin a search. Most of us give the catalog a place of great prominente an our web pages. But Information for each book is limited to the author, title, and a few subject headings. Seldom can book reviews, jacket summaries, recommendations, or tables of contents be found-or anything at all to help users determine if they want the material. - Lack of coverage - Most catalogs do not allow patrons to discover even all the books that are available to them. If you're lucky, your catalog may cover the collections of those libraries with which you have close ties-such as a regional network. But that leaves out all those items that could be requested via interlibrary loan. As Steve Coffman pointed out in his "Building Earth's Largest Library" article, we must show our users the universe that is open to them, highlight the items most accessible, and provide an estimate of how long it would take to obtain other items. - Inability to increase coverage - Despite some well-meaning attempts to smash everything of interest into the library catalog, the fact remains that most integrated library systems expect MARC records and MARC records only. This means that whatever we want to put into the catalog must be described using MARC and AACR2 (see "Marc Must Die," LJ 10/15/02, p. 26ff.). This is a barrier to dramatically increasing the scope of a catalog system, even if we decided to do it. How would you, for example, use the Open Archives Initiative Harvesting Protocol to crawl the bibliographic records of remote repositories and make them searchable within your library catalog? It can't be dope, and it shouldn't. The library catalog should be a record of a given library's holdings. Period.
- User Interface hostility - Recently I used the Library catalogs of two public libraries, new products from two major library vendors. A link an one catalog said "Knowledge Portal," whatever that was supposed to mean. Clicking an it brought you to two choices: Z39.50 Bibliographic Sites and the World Wide Web. No public library user will have the faintest clue what Z39.50 is. The other catalog launched a Java applet that before long froze my web browser so badly I was forced to shut the program down. Pick a popular book and pretend you are a library patron. Choose three to five libraries at random from the lib web-cats site (pick catalogs that are not using your system) and attempt to find your book. Try as much as possible to see the system through the eyes of your patrons-a teenager, a retiree, or an older faculty member. You may not always like what you see. Now go back to your own system and try the same thing. - What should the public see? - Our users deserve an information system that helps them find all different kinds of resources-books, articles, web pages, working papers in institutional repositories-and gives them the tools to focus in an what they want. This is not, and should not be, the library catalog. It must communicate with the catalog, but it will also need to interface with other information systems, such as vendor databases and web search engines. What will such a tool look like? We are seeing the beginnings of such a tool in the current offerings of cross-database search tools from a few vendors (see "Cross-Database Search," LJ 10/15/01, p. 29ff). We are in the early stages of developing the kind of robust, userfriendly tool that will be required before we can pull our catalogs from public view. Meanwhile, we can begin by making what we have easier to understand and use."

0.064336754 = product of:
  0.12867351 = sum of:
    0.022236345 = weight(_text_:und in 913) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.022236345 = score(doc=913,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.15123956 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.217899 = idf(docFreq=13141, maxDocs=44421)
          0.06819046 = queryNorm
        0.14702731 = fieldWeight in 913, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          2.217899 = idf(docFreq=13141, maxDocs=44421)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=913)
    0.10643717 = weight(_text_:headings in 913) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.10643717 = score(doc=913,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.3308875 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.8524013 = idf(docFreq=942, maxDocs=44421)
          0.06819046 = queryNorm
        0.32167178 = fieldWeight in 913, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          4.8524013 = idf(docFreq=942, maxDocs=44421)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=913)
  0.5 = coord(2/4)

Source

Die Klassifikation und ihr Umfeld: Proc. 10. Jahrestagung der Gesellschaft für Klassifikation, Münster, 18.-21.6.1986. Hrsg.: P.O. Degens

0.053770088 = product of:
  0.21508035 = sum of:
    0.21508035 = weight(_text_:headings in 654) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.21508035 = score(doc=654,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.3308875 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.8524013 = idf(docFreq=942, maxDocs=44421)
          0.06819046 = queryNorm
        0.6500105 = fieldWeight in 654, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          4.8524013 = idf(docFreq=942, maxDocs=44421)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=654)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

Assigned topical and geographic subject headings from a sample of 3.814 bibliographic records in the University of Michigan Library's catalog were analyzed to determine the degree of match with LCSH, 10th edition and to idetify types of heading conflicts that lend themselves to automatic subject authority control. The findings showed a surprising degree of agreement: 44 percent of headings matched LCSH 10th completely. For headings without subdivisions, the match was 88,4 percent. Since 93,6 percent of the topical subdivisions that did not match LCSH were found on the free-floating lists, some consideration should be given to developing a machine-readable file of free-floating subdivisons for matching purposes.

0.053770088 = product of:
  0.21508035 = sum of:
    0.21508035 = weight(_text_:headings in 1065) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.21508035 = score(doc=1065,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.3308875 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.8524013 = idf(docFreq=942, maxDocs=44421)
          0.06819046 = queryNorm
        0.6500105 = fieldWeight in 1065, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          4.8524013 = idf(docFreq=942, maxDocs=44421)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=1065)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

Key problems of subject searches in online public access catalogs are that too much may be retrieved and that the display may be arranged in what appears to be an unintuitive and unhelpful manner. A study was undertaken on one large database to determine how often the display of a subject and its modifications and subdivisions extended over more than two screens and what the results on display would be of compressing geographic subdivisions and other modifications. The study then addressed the question of how often the display of a term and its subdivisions was interrupted by the appearance in the display of inverted headings, phrase headings, and headings with parenthetical qualifiers

0.053218585 = product of:
  0.21287434 = sum of:
    0.21287434 = weight(_text_:headings in 2777) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.21287434 = score(doc=2777,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.3308875 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.8524013 = idf(docFreq=942, maxDocs=44421)
          0.06819046 = queryNorm
        0.64334357 = fieldWeight in 2777, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          4.8524013 = idf(docFreq=942, maxDocs=44421)
          0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=2777)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

0.053218585 = product of:
  0.21287434 = sum of:
    0.21287434 = weight(_text_:headings in 2904) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.21287434 = score(doc=2904,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.3308875 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.8524013 = idf(docFreq=942, maxDocs=44421)
          0.06819046 = queryNorm
        0.64334357 = fieldWeight in 2904, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          4.8524013 = idf(docFreq=942, maxDocs=44421)
          0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=2904)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

0.053218585 = product of:
  0.21287434 = sum of:
    0.21287434 = weight(_text_:headings in 574) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.21287434 = score(doc=574,freq=8.0), product of:
        0.3308875 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.8524013 = idf(docFreq=942, maxDocs=44421)
          0.06819046 = queryNorm
        0.64334357 = fieldWeight in 574, product of:
          2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
            8.0 = termFreq=8.0
          4.8524013 = idf(docFreq=942, maxDocs=44421)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=574)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

Central to subject searching is the match between user vocabulary and the headings from Library of Congress Subject-Headings (LCSH) used in a library catalog. This paper evaluates previous matching studies, proposes a detailed list of matching categories, and tests LCSH in a study using these categories. Exact and partial match categories are defined for single LCSH and multiple LCSH matches to user expressions. One no-match category is included. Transaction logs from ORION, UCLA's online Information system, were used to collect user expressions for a comparison of LCSH and user language. Results show that single LCSH headings match user expressions exactly about 47% of the time; that single subject heading matches, including exact matches, comprise 74% of the total; that partial matches, to both single and multiple headings, comprise about 21% of the total; and that no match occurs 5% of the time.

0.053218585 = product of:
  0.21287434 = sum of:
    0.21287434 = weight(_text_:headings in 384) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.21287434 = score(doc=384,freq=18.0), product of:
        0.3308875 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.8524013 = idf(docFreq=942, maxDocs=44421)
          0.06819046 = queryNorm
        0.64334357 = fieldWeight in 384, product of:
          4.2426405 = tf(freq=18.0), with freq of:
            18.0 = termFreq=18.0
          4.8524013 = idf(docFreq=942, maxDocs=44421)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=384)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

This short guide is intended to help librarians and OPAC system designers to make decisions about the design of displays of more than one subject heading. The authors stress that they offer guidance rather than standards or prescriptions; their clear prose is cautious and even the number of recommendations is limited. A 12-page introduction contrasts the "structural approach" and "strict alphabetical approach" to filing, showing examples and stating arguments for each. 7 chapters cover display of subdivisions, inverted headings, display of qualified headings, arrangement of numerical headings, display of subjects interfiled with names and titles, punctuation and messages to the user. Within each chapter, questions involving choices between two or more approaches are followed by brief statements of current practice (LC rules, ALA rules, and systems in existing OPACs) extensive examples demonstrating such choices, and arguments for and against each. The authors warn against ever assuming that the user knows the needed subject headings, and acknowledge that the best OPAC design often depends on the setting and on the user's understanding of the system. Although the topic may be beyond the purview of the authoring committee, the discussion here makes one yearn for interactive OPACs that can analyze the user's needs and provide appropriate guidance to whatever system is adopted

Editor

Subcommittee on the Display of Subject Headings in Subject Indexes in OPACs, Subject Analysis Committee, Cataloging and Classification Section, ALCTS, ALA

LCSH

Subject headings, Library of Congress / Evaluation

Subject

Subject headings, Library of Congress / Evaluation

0.050174966 = product of:
  0.20069987 = sum of:
    0.20069987 = weight(_text_:headings in 1502) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.20069987 = score(doc=1502,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.3308875 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.8524013 = idf(docFreq=942, maxDocs=44421)
          0.06819046 = queryNorm
        0.60655016 = fieldWeight in 1502, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          4.8524013 = idf(docFreq=942, maxDocs=44421)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=1502)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

This paper recognizes the limitations of the existing file of Library of Congress authority records for subject heading assignment and validation. It makes recommendations for a new machine-readable file of authority records for topical subdivisions and for enhancements to the existing subject authority file. The recommended changes qould enable online systems to assist in subject heading formulation and verify, with limited assistance by human intermediaries, the individual components of subdivided headings. A study of subdivided subject headings in a large bibliographic database forms the basis of the recommendations

0.050174966 = product of:
  0.20069987 = sum of:
    0.20069987 = weight(_text_:headings in 2939) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.20069987 = score(doc=2939,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.3308875 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.8524013 = idf(docFreq=942, maxDocs=44421)
          0.06819046 = queryNorm
        0.60655016 = fieldWeight in 2939, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          4.8524013 = idf(docFreq=942, maxDocs=44421)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=2939)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

This paper suggests that the cataloging community may be setting its goals too low in its approach to online subject access. Truly effective subject retrieval for online catalog users will not be possible until the Library of Congress gives a higher priority to consistency in the assignment of subject headings. In recognition of the intellectual complexity of LCSH, the paper proposes the appointment of subject specialists to monitor the assignment of subject headings at the Library of Congress.

0.049583495 = product of:
  0.19833398 = sum of:
    0.19833398 = weight(_text_:headings in 3549) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.19833398 = score(doc=3549,freq=10.0), product of:
        0.3308875 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.8524013 = idf(docFreq=942, maxDocs=44421)
          0.06819046 = queryNorm
        0.59940004 = fieldWeight in 3549, product of:
          3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
            10.0 = termFreq=10.0
          4.8524013 = idf(docFreq=942, maxDocs=44421)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3549)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

Purpose - This paper aims at providing a robust, user-friendly and efficient navigation procedure in an online library catalog that is based on semantic information encapsulated within subject headings. Design/methodology/approach - The paper describes an interactive navigation procedure inside an online library catalog based on semantic information. The proposed approach is presented through a web-based, prototype application following the most recent trends of the semantic web such as AJAX technology and the web ontology language - OWL for encoding semantics. Findings - According to the proposed method, a GUI interface exposes the hierarchy of the subject headings employed within an OPAC, as well as all stated relations between such headings, as links that the user can follow, effectively traversing the ontology and formulating at the same time the actual query to the underlying OPAC. This act of interactive navigation through the library's assets aids searchers in accurately formulating their queries, by offering broader or narrower concepts for selection or indicating alternative or related concepts they might be initially unaware of. The augmented exposition of inter-relations between concepts provides multiple paths for information retrieval and enables searchers to fulfill their information needs in a faster, more efficient and intuitive manner. Practical implications - The paper includes implications for the development of modern, semantic web applications focused on the library domain. The novel approach of visualizing subject headings could be further extended to visualize a number of other conceptualizations of the library domain. Originality/value - This paper fulfils an identified need to take advantage of the "hidden knowledge" existing within the library domain but, for a number of reasons, is never exposed to the library users.

0.04608865 = product of:
  0.1843546 = sum of:
    0.1843546 = weight(_text_:headings in 527) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.1843546 = score(doc=527,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.3308875 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.8524013 = idf(docFreq=942, maxDocs=44421)
          0.06819046 = queryNorm
        0.5571519 = fieldWeight in 527, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          4.8524013 = idf(docFreq=942, maxDocs=44421)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=527)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

The implementation of our online integrated catalog ACORN at Vanderbilt University Library has been a complex and time-consuming task. The authority control component represents an important portion of the effort. The authority file consists of approximately one-half million name, subject, series, and uniform title headings, the majority of which were supplied to us by a vendor, Blackwell North America (BNA). Authority work has been integrated into our cataloging routine successfully, new headings are being added to our database daily, and extant headings are being validated online. This paper will cover a description of how Vanderbilt selected the Northwestern Online Total Integrated System (NOTIS); the ongoing editing of the authority file following the BNA processing; the interrelationship of Vanderbilt University Library's three processing units, General Technical Services (GTS), Medical Library, and Law Library apropos of the authority function; and some of the policies and procedures drawn up by the Authority Control Coordinator with the assistance of the other librarians in Monograph and Serial Services.

0.04434882 = product of:
  0.17739528 = sum of:
    0.17739528 = weight(_text_:headings in 885) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.17739528 = score(doc=885,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.3308875 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.8524013 = idf(docFreq=942, maxDocs=44421)
          0.06819046 = queryNorm
        0.53611964 = fieldWeight in 885, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          4.8524013 = idf(docFreq=942, maxDocs=44421)
          0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=885)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

An experimental online catalog was developed that provided searchers with several different subject searching strategies. Analyses of retrieval test data suggest that searchers expect alphabetical searches to provide lists of assigned subject headings conceptually related to their topics of interest. System designers can now respond to their expectation by incorporating LCSH-mr in online catalogs

0.04434882 = product of:
  0.17739528 = sum of:
    0.17739528 = weight(_text_:headings in 3852) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.17739528 = score(doc=3852,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.3308875 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.8524013 = idf(docFreq=942, maxDocs=44421)
          0.06819046 = queryNorm
        0.53611964 = fieldWeight in 3852, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          4.8524013 = idf(docFreq=942, maxDocs=44421)
          0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=3852)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

3 ways to improve access to monographs are additional subject headings, analytic added entires and contents notes. Focuses on California State University. Describes the project, the CSU-Chico results and advices upon when to add contents notes

0.043903094 = product of:
  0.17561238 = sum of:
    0.17561238 = weight(_text_:headings in 4286) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.17561238 = score(doc=4286,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.3308875 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.8524013 = idf(docFreq=942, maxDocs=44421)
          0.06819046 = queryNorm
        0.5307314 = fieldWeight in 4286, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          4.8524013 = idf(docFreq=942, maxDocs=44421)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=4286)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

LCSH

Subject headings, Library of Congress / Problems, exercises, etc

Subject

Subject headings, Library of Congress / Problems, exercises, etc

0.043903094 = product of:
  0.17561238 = sum of:
    0.17561238 = weight(_text_:headings in 2631) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.17561238 = score(doc=2631,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.3308875 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.8524013 = idf(docFreq=942, maxDocs=44421)
          0.06819046 = queryNorm
        0.5307314 = fieldWeight in 2631, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          4.8524013 = idf(docFreq=942, maxDocs=44421)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=2631)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

Amstelveen Public Library in the Netherlands introduced the online Kid's Catalog in 1997 to enable young users to access the library's catalogue. The system was developed in the United States and has been translated into Dutch for use in Amstelveen. The system enables users to access the catalogue through a menu of icons or by typing in author, title and subject headings. The system can recognise typing errors and offer corrected headings. The system is extremely popular both with children and adults

0.043903094 = product of:
  0.17561238 = sum of:
    0.17561238 = weight(_text_:headings in 3775) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.17561238 = score(doc=3775,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.3308875 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.8524013 = idf(docFreq=942, maxDocs=44421)
          0.06819046 = queryNorm
        0.5307314 = fieldWeight in 3775, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          4.8524013 = idf(docFreq=942, maxDocs=44421)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=3775)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

Browse searching of online catalogs and electronic indexes is a popular means of retrieving information, but some subject heading lists are so extensive that browsing them can be difficult and time-consuming. This resaerch tested one way of presenting a browse interface to reduce the amount of scanning of subject headings required. It found that a hierarchical presentation of headings reduced the amount of scanning required by more than 50% without any reduction in the effectiveness of the search. Better browsable displays of this sort can improve the efficiency of searching but appear not to alter effectivenenss

0.037631225 = product of:
  0.1505249 = sum of:
    0.1505249 = weight(_text_:headings in 582) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.1505249 = score(doc=582,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.3308875 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.8524013 = idf(docFreq=942, maxDocs=44421)
          0.06819046 = queryNorm
        0.4549126 = fieldWeight in 582, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          4.8524013 = idf(docFreq=942, maxDocs=44421)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=582)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

The main purpose of the study was to determine if the online catalog can function both as a dictionary and classified catalog without requiring additional time or intellectual effort on the part of the cataloger. A total of 1842 MARC bibliographic records listed in the 370-379 classified section of American Book Publishing Record were studied. These records displayed 2735 subject headings. Of these, 1491 (55%) had a Library of Congress classification number linked to them. An alphabetical and classified index was created using primary subjects and their related classification numbers. While such an index could be a useful browsing device if integrated into an online catalog, creating a bona fide classified catalog would require assigning classification numbers to the secondary subject headings.