Search (339 results, page 1 of 17)

0.10338868 = product of:
  0.41355473 = sum of:
    0.41355473 = weight(_text_:jones in 2140) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.41355473 = score(doc=2140,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.43290398 = queryWeight, product of:
          6.176015 = idf(docFreq=250, maxDocs=44421)
          0.070094384 = queryNorm
        0.9553036 = fieldWeight in 2140, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          6.176015 = idf(docFreq=250, maxDocs=44421)
          0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=2140)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

0.10338868 = product of:
  0.41355473 = sum of:
    0.41355473 = weight(_text_:jones in 3850) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.41355473 = score(doc=3850,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.43290398 = queryWeight, product of:
          6.176015 = idf(docFreq=250, maxDocs=44421)
          0.070094384 = queryNorm
        0.9553036 = fieldWeight in 3850, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          6.176015 = idf(docFreq=250, maxDocs=44421)
          0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=3850)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

0.09682323 = product of:
  0.19364646 = sum of:
    0.10338868 = weight(_text_:jones in 3768) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.10338868 = score(doc=3768,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.43290398 = queryWeight, product of:
          6.176015 = idf(docFreq=250, maxDocs=44421)
          0.070094384 = queryNorm
        0.2388259 = fieldWeight in 3768, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          6.176015 = idf(docFreq=250, maxDocs=44421)
          0.02734375 = fieldNorm(doc=3768)
    0.090257786 = weight(_text_:headings in 3768) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.090257786 = score(doc=3768,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.34012607 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.8524013 = idf(docFreq=942, maxDocs=44421)
          0.070094384 = queryNorm
        0.2653657 = fieldWeight in 3768, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          4.8524013 = idf(docFreq=942, maxDocs=44421)
          0.02734375 = fieldNorm(doc=3768)
  0.5 = coord(2/4)

Abstract

Subject searching is the most common but also the most conflictive searching for end user. The aim of this paper is to check how users expressions match subject headings and to prove if knowledge structure used in online catalogs enhances searching effectiveness. A bibliographic revision about difficulties in subject access and proposed methods to improve it is also presented. For the empirical analysis, transaction logs from two university libraries, online catalogs (CISNE and FAMA) were collected. Results show that more than a quarter of user queries are effective due to an alphabetical subject index approach and browsing through hypertextual links. 1. Introduction Since the 1980's, online public access catalogs (OPAC's) have become usual way to access bibliographic information. During the last two decades the technological development has helped to extend their use, making feasible the access for a whole of users that is getting more and more extensive and heterogeneous, and also to incorporate information resources in electronic formats and to interconnect systems. However, technology seems to have developed faster than our knowledge about the tasks where it has been applied and than the evolution of our capacities for adapting to it. The conceptual model of OPAC has been hardly modified recently, and for interacting with them, users still need to combine the same skills and basic knowledge than at the beginning of its introduction (Borgman, 1986, 2000): a) conceptual knowledge to translate the information need into an appropriate query because of a well-designed mental model of the system, b) semantic and syntactic knowledge to be able to implement that query (access fields, searching type, Boolean logic, etc.) and c) basic technical skills in computing. At present many users have the essential technical skills to make use, with more or less expertise, of a computer. This number is substantially reduced when it is referred to the conceptual, semantic and syntactic knowledge that is necessary to achieve a moderately satisfactory search. An added difficulty arises in subject searching, as users should concrete their unknown information needs in terms that the information retrieval system can understand. Many researches have focused an unskilled searchers' difficulties to enter an effective query. The mental models influence, users assumption about characteristics, structure, contents and operation of the system they interact with have been analysed (Dillon, 2000; Dimitroff, 2000). Another issue that implies difficulties is vocabulary: how to find the right terms to implement a query and to modify it as the case may be. Terminology and expressions characteristics used in searching (Bates, 1993), the match between user terms and the subject headings from the catalog (Carlyle, 1989; Drabensttot, 1996; Drabensttot & Vizine-Goetz, 1994), the incidence of spelling errors (Drabensttot and Weller, 1996; Ferl and Millsap, 1996; Walker and Jones, 1987), users problems

0.07384906 = product of:
  0.29539624 = sum of:
    0.29539624 = weight(_text_:jones in 795) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.29539624 = score(doc=795,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.43290398 = queryWeight, product of:
          6.176015 = idf(docFreq=250, maxDocs=44421)
          0.070094384 = queryNorm
        0.6823597 = fieldWeight in 795, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          6.176015 = idf(docFreq=250, maxDocs=44421)
          0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=795)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

0.07384906 = product of:
  0.29539624 = sum of:
    0.29539624 = weight(_text_:jones in 6438) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.29539624 = score(doc=6438,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.43290398 = queryWeight, product of:
          6.176015 = idf(docFreq=250, maxDocs=44421)
          0.070094384 = queryNorm
        0.6823597 = fieldWeight in 6438, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          6.176015 = idf(docFreq=250, maxDocs=44421)
          0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=6438)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

0.07384906 = product of:
  0.29539624 = sum of:
    0.29539624 = weight(_text_:jones in 2942) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.29539624 = score(doc=2942,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.43290398 = queryWeight, product of:
          6.176015 = idf(docFreq=250, maxDocs=44421)
          0.070094384 = queryNorm
        0.6823597 = fieldWeight in 2942, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          6.176015 = idf(docFreq=250, maxDocs=44421)
          0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=2942)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Footnote

Wiederabgedruckt in: Readings in information retrieval. Ed.: K. Sparck Jones u. P. Willett. San Francisco: Morgan Kaufmann 1997. S.424-435.

0.06613308 = product of:
  0.13226616 = sum of:
    0.022857198 = weight(_text_:und in 913) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.022857198 = score(doc=913,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.15546227 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.217899 = idf(docFreq=13141, maxDocs=44421)
          0.070094384 = 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)
    0.10940896 = weight(_text_:headings in 913) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.10940896 = score(doc=913,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.34012607 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.8524013 = idf(docFreq=942, maxDocs=44421)
          0.070094384 = 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

0.059079245 = product of:
  0.23631698 = sum of:
    0.23631698 = weight(_text_:jones in 3107) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.23631698 = score(doc=3107,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.43290398 = queryWeight, product of:
          6.176015 = idf(docFreq=250, maxDocs=44421)
          0.070094384 = queryNorm
        0.54588777 = fieldWeight in 3107, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          6.176015 = idf(docFreq=250, maxDocs=44421)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=3107)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

Describes the cooperative efforts of computer centre staff and library staff at Bentley College, Massachusetts, to create end user interfaces to enable the locally loaded data bases on the on-line catalogue to be searched off-campus by remote users as well as by library users on campus. Describes the success obtained using 2 data bases: LEXIS and Dow Jones News Retrieval Service

0.05527138 = product of:
  0.22108552 = sum of:
    0.22108552 = weight(_text_:headings in 654) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.22108552 = score(doc=654,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.34012607 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.8524013 = idf(docFreq=942, maxDocs=44421)
          0.070094384 = 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.

0.05527138 = product of:
  0.22108552 = sum of:
    0.22108552 = weight(_text_:headings in 1065) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.22108552 = score(doc=1065,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.34012607 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.8524013 = idf(docFreq=942, maxDocs=44421)
          0.070094384 = 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

0.05470448 = product of:
  0.21881792 = sum of:
    0.21881792 = weight(_text_:headings in 2777) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.21881792 = score(doc=2777,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.34012607 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.8524013 = idf(docFreq=942, maxDocs=44421)
          0.070094384 = 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)

0.05470448 = product of:
  0.21881792 = sum of:
    0.21881792 = weight(_text_:headings in 2904) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.21881792 = score(doc=2904,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.34012607 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.8524013 = idf(docFreq=942, maxDocs=44421)
          0.070094384 = 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)

0.05470448 = product of:
  0.21881792 = sum of:
    0.21881792 = weight(_text_:headings in 574) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.21881792 = score(doc=574,freq=8.0), product of:
        0.34012607 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.8524013 = idf(docFreq=942, maxDocs=44421)
          0.070094384 = 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.

0.05470448 = product of:
  0.21881792 = sum of:
    0.21881792 = weight(_text_:headings in 384) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.21881792 = score(doc=384,freq=18.0), product of:
        0.34012607 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.8524013 = idf(docFreq=942, maxDocs=44421)
          0.070094384 = 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

0.05169434 = product of:
  0.20677736 = sum of:
    0.20677736 = weight(_text_:jones in 1052) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.20677736 = score(doc=1052,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.43290398 = queryWeight, product of:
          6.176015 = idf(docFreq=250, maxDocs=44421)
          0.070094384 = queryNorm
        0.4776518 = fieldWeight in 1052, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          6.176015 = idf(docFreq=250, maxDocs=44421)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=1052)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Content

Entählt u.a. die Beiträge: CLEVERDON, C.: Optimizing convenient online access to bibliographic databases; SALTON, G.: Automatic indexing and abstracting; HARTER, S.P.: Statistical approaches to automatic indexing; WALKER, S.: Improving subject access painlessly: recent work on the OKAPI online catalogue projects; SPARCK JONES, K.: A statistical interpretation of term specifity and its application in retrieval; CROFT, W.B. u. D.J. HARPER: Using probabilistic model of document retrieval without relevance information; BERSTEIN, L. u. R.E. WILLIAMSON: Testing of a natural language retrieval system for a full text knowledge base; FRAKES, W.B.: Term conflation for information retrieval; PORTER, M. u. V. GALPIN: Relevance feedback in a public access catalogue for a research library: MUSCAT at the Scott Polar Institute; SALTON, G. u. M.J. McGILL: The SMART and SIRE experimental retrieval systems; BRZOZOWSKI, J.P. MASQUERADE: searching full text of abstracts using automatic indexing; DOSZKOCS, T.E.: CITE NLM: Natural-language searching in an online catalog

0.05169434 = product of:
  0.20677736 = sum of:
    0.20677736 = weight(_text_:jones in 1430) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.20677736 = score(doc=1430,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.43290398 = queryWeight, product of:
          6.176015 = idf(docFreq=250, maxDocs=44421)
          0.070094384 = queryNorm
        0.4776518 = fieldWeight in 1430, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          6.176015 = idf(docFreq=250, maxDocs=44421)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=1430)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

0.05157588 = product of:
  0.20630352 = sum of:
    0.20630352 = weight(_text_:headings in 1502) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.20630352 = score(doc=1502,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.34012607 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.8524013 = idf(docFreq=942, maxDocs=44421)
          0.070094384 = 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

0.05157588 = product of:
  0.20630352 = sum of:
    0.20630352 = weight(_text_:headings in 2939) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.20630352 = score(doc=2939,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.34012607 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.8524013 = idf(docFreq=942, maxDocs=44421)
          0.070094384 = 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.

0.050967894 = product of:
  0.20387158 = sum of:
    0.20387158 = weight(_text_:headings in 3549) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.20387158 = score(doc=3549,freq=10.0), product of:
        0.34012607 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.8524013 = idf(docFreq=942, maxDocs=44421)
          0.070094384 = 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.

0.047375474 = product of:
  0.1895019 = sum of:
    0.1895019 = weight(_text_:headings in 527) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.1895019 = score(doc=527,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.34012607 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.8524013 = idf(docFreq=942, maxDocs=44421)
          0.070094384 = 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.