什么时候人类索引可能被强烈证明是合理的

J. Warner
{"title":"什么时候人类索引可能被强烈证明是合理的","authors":"J. Warner","doi":"10.35492/DOCAM/6/1/5","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The paper is concerned with the justification for human indexing, in the modern era. We understand human indexing in a classic sense, of human description of information objects in accord with a controlled vocabulary.\n\nA justification for human indexing would be, when it yields a value commensurate with its cost. A long historically established value for retrieval systems is selection power, or an enhanced capacity for informed choice for the searcher.\n\nThe question of the justification for human indexing is made analytically tractable by reversing the historical order of development. We ask, what forms of selection power are not readily obtainable from human use of computationally generated selection processes in searching?\n\nSelection processes widely available for searching written documents, for words, phrases, and combinations of words and phrases, are reviewed in ascending order of creativity.\n\nHuman indexing is strongly justified, when the exchange value involved in producing its use value (likely to be realized as generic power) are commensurate with the exchange value it can command.\n\nThe argument is conducted with written documents as examples but the possibility of extension of its conclusion to non-written documents is indicated.","PeriodicalId":309087,"journal":{"name":"Proceedings from the 2019 Annual Meeting of the Document Academy","volume":"68 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2019-04-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"When Might Human Indexing Be Strongly Justified\",\"authors\":\"J. Warner\",\"doi\":\"10.35492/DOCAM/6/1/5\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"The paper is concerned with the justification for human indexing, in the modern era. We understand human indexing in a classic sense, of human description of information objects in accord with a controlled vocabulary.\\n\\nA justification for human indexing would be, when it yields a value commensurate with its cost. A long historically established value for retrieval systems is selection power, or an enhanced capacity for informed choice for the searcher.\\n\\nThe question of the justification for human indexing is made analytically tractable by reversing the historical order of development. We ask, what forms of selection power are not readily obtainable from human use of computationally generated selection processes in searching?\\n\\nSelection processes widely available for searching written documents, for words, phrases, and combinations of words and phrases, are reviewed in ascending order of creativity.\\n\\nHuman indexing is strongly justified, when the exchange value involved in producing its use value (likely to be realized as generic power) are commensurate with the exchange value it can command.\\n\\nThe argument is conducted with written documents as examples but the possibility of extension of its conclusion to non-written documents is indicated.\",\"PeriodicalId\":309087,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Proceedings from the 2019 Annual Meeting of the Document Academy\",\"volume\":\"68 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2019-04-30\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Proceedings from the 2019 Annual Meeting of the Document Academy\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.35492/DOCAM/6/1/5\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Proceedings from the 2019 Annual Meeting of the Document Academy","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.35492/DOCAM/6/1/5","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

摘要

本文探讨了在现代社会,人为标引的合理性。我们从经典意义上理解人类索引,即人类按照受控词汇对信息对象进行描述。人工编制索引的理由是,当它产生的价值与其成本相称时。检索系统的长期历史价值是选择能力,或增强搜索者知情选择的能力。通过倒转历史的发展顺序,对人类索引的合理性问题进行了分析处理。我们的问题是,在搜索过程中,人类使用计算生成的选择过程,哪些形式的选择能力是不容易获得的?选择过程广泛适用于搜索书面文件,单词,短语,以及单词和短语的组合,以创造力的升序进行审查。当产生其使用价值(可能实现为通用权力)所涉及的交换价值与它所能控制的交换价值相称时,人为索引是非常合理的。本文以书面文件为例进行了论证,但指出了将其结论扩展到非书面文件的可能性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
When Might Human Indexing Be Strongly Justified
The paper is concerned with the justification for human indexing, in the modern era. We understand human indexing in a classic sense, of human description of information objects in accord with a controlled vocabulary. A justification for human indexing would be, when it yields a value commensurate with its cost. A long historically established value for retrieval systems is selection power, or an enhanced capacity for informed choice for the searcher. The question of the justification for human indexing is made analytically tractable by reversing the historical order of development. We ask, what forms of selection power are not readily obtainable from human use of computationally generated selection processes in searching? Selection processes widely available for searching written documents, for words, phrases, and combinations of words and phrases, are reviewed in ascending order of creativity. Human indexing is strongly justified, when the exchange value involved in producing its use value (likely to be realized as generic power) are commensurate with the exchange value it can command. The argument is conducted with written documents as examples but the possibility of extension of its conclusion to non-written documents is indicated.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信