Skip to main content Accessibility help

We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.

Close cookie message
×
  1. Home
  2. Publications
  3. Publishing partners
  4. Facet Publishing
  5. Content Listing

Refine listing

Refine listing

Access:
Content type:
Publication date:
Apply   From and To filters
Subject: Show more
Journals Show more
Publishers: Show more
Societies Show more
Series: Show more
Collections: Show more

Actions for selected content:

Select all | Deselect all
  • View selected items
  • Export citations
  • Download PDF (zip)
  • Save to Kindle
  • Save to Dropbox
  • Save to Google Drive

Save Search

You can save your searches here and later view and run them again in "My saved searches".

Please provide a title, maximum of 40 characters.
Cancel
×

5856 results in Facet Publishing

Page 125 of 293

  • 12 - School libraries

  • from PART 2 - EBLIP IN ACTION
    • By Carol A. Gordon, Principal of Gordon Consulting, an international consultancy with a mission to support initiatives that empower educators to develop creative 21st century learning environments and experiences.
  • Edited by Allison Brettle, Denise Koufogiannakis
  • Book:
    Being Evidence Based in Library and Information Practice
    Published by:
    Facet
    Published online:
    08 June 2018
    Print publication:
    31 August 2016, pp 133-150

  • Summary

    School libraries have played an important role in the education of young people around the globe for many decades, but today they are more critical than ever. The school library is often the best-equipped ‘classroom’ for educating digital youth accustomed to self-directed information seeking, personalized learning and content creation. Evidence for what works is increasingly important as education transitions from an industrial-age model of teaching to a digital-age model for learning. What do we want students to learn? How will they best learn it? How will we know that they have learned it? In an attempt to address these questions, school libraries are embracing EBLIP to validate and gain support for new ways of learning. This chapter examines several dimensions of EBLIP and illustrates how evidence-based approaches are changing school libraries and the work of the school librarian or teacher-librarian.

    Overview of school libraries today

    Initially conceived as traditional libraries defined by their collections, school libraries evolved to support school curricula. When audio-visual media began to package information in sound and image, school libraries became media centres and information literacy replaced bibliographic instruction as best practice. The most recent evolution of school libraries is as networked, digital and physical environments for young learners where they confront information overload and screen-based reading. The curriculum is guided by a definition of information literacy that includes critical reading and thinking. The pedagogy is information-based enquiry that requires learners to construct new knowledge within a curriculum-based learning task, such as the following:

    You are a journalist who uses primary sources to refute the claims of Holocaust deniers. Publish a print or online news report that contains your strongest evidence and arguments for the Jewish Holocaust as a historical event.

    This kind of intellectual challenge requires librarians and teachers to work collaboratively, gathering evidence of students’ progress, or lack of it. Evidence resides in students’ work and instruction takes the form of feedback. As students use feedback to revise their work, so the teacher-librarian team uses feedback to revise their teaching.

    Everyone is a learner as students work in a participatory culture of face-to-face and online learning communities and educators collaborate in communities of practice. This kind of evidence-based approach to instruction has significant implications for the school library and the work of the teacher-librarian.

  • 4 - Adopting ontologies

  • David Stuart
  • Book:
    Practical Ontologies for Information Professionals
    Published by:
    Facet
    Published online:
    09 June 2018
    Print publication:
    31 August 2016, pp 79-96

  • Summary

    Introduction

    With a large number of ontologies already available, there will be many occasions when an ontology will already exist that fulfils some or all of an information professional's ontology requirements. The reuse of existing ontologies can not only help with the integration of data across different systems, but may, importantly, also reduce the repetition of work.

    This chapter starts by considering the importance of reusing existing ontologies in more detail, before going on to explore some of the tools that are available for identifying existing ontologies, and some of the issues that may contribute to deciding whether or not to incorporate a particular ontology.

    Reusing ontologies: application profiles and data models

    The reuse of existing knowledge organization systems and processes is well established within the library community. Most libraries find it far more appropriate to adopt or extend an existing classification or cataloguing system than create a bespoke in-house system, with the advantages of a custom-made system far outweighed by the costs of maintaining the system and making use of other institutions’ data.

    The principal reasons for reusing an existing ontology are the same as those for reusing other existing knowledge organization systems: cost-effectiveness and facilitating the interoperability of data. Although cost-effectiveness may be considered particularly pertinent to adoption of an ontology with a large number of instances, and interoperability particularly applicable to the adoption of existing element sets, both reasons apply (albeit not equally) to both parts of an ontology: the development of a logically consistent element set with clearly defined classes and properties that can accommodate all expected types of instance is not necessarily a simple process, whilst the adoption of the same instances across multiple platforms may facilitate information retrieval from multiple sites and sources. For the sake of simplicity, however, here we primarily consider cost-effectiveness in terms of ontologies with a large number of instances, and the advantage of adopting existing element sets for data interoperability.

    The number of instances that may be created on average per hour will vary considerably in ontology development (as Hedden, 2010, notes for taxonomical terms), but the creation of a high-quality ontology can nonetheless be expected to be extremely labour-intensive, especially when talking about an extremely large ontology or broad subject area.

Being Evidence Based in Library and Information Practice
  • Edited by Allison Brettle, Denise Koufogiannakis
  • Published by:
    Facet
    Published online:
    08 June 2018
    Print publication:
    31 August 2016
  • This book builds a research-grounded, theoretical foundation for evidence based library and information practice and illustrates how librarians can incorporate the principles to make more informed decisions in the workplace. The book takes an open and encompassing approach to exploring evidence based library and information practice (EBLIP) and the ways it can improve the practice of librarianship. Bringing together recent theory, research, and case studies, the book provides librarians with a new reference point for how they can use and create evidence within their practice, in order to better meet the needs of their communities. Being Evidence Based in Library and Information Practice is divided into two parts; in the first part the editors explore the background to EBLIP and put forward a new model for its application in the workplace which encompasses 5 elements: Articulate, Assemble, Assess, Agree, Adapt. In the second part, contributors from academic, public, health, school and special libraries from around the world provide an overview of EBLIP developments in their sector and offer examples of successful implementation. Being Evidence Based in Library and Information Practice will be essential reading for library and information professionals from all sectors who want to make more informed decisions and better meet the needs of their users. The book will also be of interest to students of library and information studies and researchers.

  • 9 - Academic libraries

  • from PART 2 - EBLIP IN ACTION
    • By Mary M. Somerville, University Librarian for University of the Pacific Libraries in Sacramento, San Francisco, and Stockton, California., Lorie A. Kloda, Associate University Librarian for Planning and Community Relations at Concordia University in Montreal, Canada.
  • Edited by Allison Brettle, Denise Koufogiannakis
  • Book:
    Being Evidence Based in Library and Information Practice
    Published by:
    Facet
    Published online:
    08 June 2018
    Print publication:
    31 August 2016, pp 93-104

  • Summary

    Academic librarianship is well suited to EBLIP. In this chapter, we provide some context as to why this is the case – the rapidly changing role of academic libraries and librarians, as well as higher education institutions more generally. The knowledge base of evidence is described, in terms both of the types of research available and of the size and scope of the available evidence. The knowledge base in academic librarianship is growing quickly, due to research on developing issues in higher education and academic libraries, as well as an increased focus on assessment and evaluation programmes for continuous improvement and demonstrating value.

    We discuss the types of evidence sources available for academic librarians to draw on beyond the traditional journal article and conference presentation, and examine how librarians are creating evidence, in some cases by collaborating with others who work outside of libraries. Methods used by academic librarians for finding and using evidence to inform decision making are presented, along with considerations regarding organizational climate, or readiness for EBP. We conclude with examples from the academic library sector of successful application of the principles of EBLIP for informing changes in practice and transforming organizational processes.

    The changing landscape and growing body of evidence

    The role of academic libraries and the practice of academic librarianship have been transformed in recent years by dramatic changes in both higher education and scholarly publishing. Print has transitioned increasingly to electronic form and librarians have been vigilant in ensuring seamless access to online resources as well as encouraging their integration into discovery layers and learningmanagement systems. In anticipation of emerging publication models and platforms with new licensing requirements, highly skilled experts in acquisition, discovery and access are required. At the same time, conversations about learningmanagement systems’ features, including customization and personalization, have advanced students’ and researchers’ engagement with library resources in order to improve learning outcomes. Physical library facilities have also changed, increasingly employing participatory design methodologies with campus stakeholders, with a focus on users’ needs. All of these changes have both drawn from and contributed to a growing body of research, making academic librarianship the ideal setting for EBLIP.

  • 5 - Building ontologies

  • David Stuart
  • Book:
    Practical Ontologies for Information Professionals
    Published by:
    Facet
    Published online:
    09 June 2018
    Print publication:
    31 August 2016, pp 97-136

  • Summary

    Introduction

    It is important that information professionals are not only users of existing ontologies, but that they build their own. This is not only important because of the large number of areas that still require the development of ontologies, but also because it is only through the development of ontologies that we come to fully appreciate the associated tools and technologies.

    This chapter starts with a broad methodology for building an ontology and an overview of some of the different tools that are available for building an ontology. The chapter finishes with an ontology development example that focuses on the development of an ontology element set, designed for capturing information about bibliometric metrics and indicators.

    Approaches to building an ontology

    There have been a number of different approaches to ontology development, although as Noy and McGuinness (2001) state, ‘there is no single correct ontology-design methodology’. The appropriateness of a particular methodology will depend heavily on the purpose of the ontology; the approach taken in the development of an enterprise ontology to aid with the retrieval of internal documents in a multinational corporation will differ significantly from the development of an element set by a postdoctoral researcher within an academic institution wanting to publish a particular set of research data.

    Tonkin, Pfeiffer and Hewson (2010) distinguish between three types of method - ology for ontology development methodologies: self-reflective methodologies; collaborative approaches; and empirical methodologies. A self-reflective methodology is the simplest: a single person is responsible for the development of an ontology based on the knowledge he or she already possesses. In the case of the post-doctoral researcher mentioned above, a self-reflective methodology may prove sufficient, especially where it is a highly specialized area with a limited tradition of data sharing. Where there is a more established history of data sharing, or a domain is too large for a single person to comprehend or encompasses differing perspectives, then a collaborative approach may be more appropriate, with a consensus viewpoint being based on multiple individuals’ expert knowledge. Such a collaborative approach could be important in the development of an enterprise ontology in a multinational corporation, where no single individual would be sufficiently knowledgeable on the organization as a whole or the different perspectives involved.

  • 8 - Practitioner-researchers and EBLIP

  • from PART 2 - EBLIP IN ACTION
    • By Virginia Wilson, Director of the Centre for Evidence Based Library and Information Practice (C-EBLIP) at the University Library, University of Saskatchewan (U of S), Canada
  • Edited by Allison Brettle, Denise Koufogiannakis
  • Book:
    Being Evidence Based in Library and Information Practice
    Published by:
    Facet
    Published online:
    08 June 2018
    Print publication:
    31 August 2016, pp 81-92

  • Summary

    Research can be a mysterious domain, especially if you are approaching it from a practice perspective. Traditionally, research has been undertaken by academics in higher education, faculty members of the professoriate who often have a 40/40/20 work assignment split between teaching, research and service. However, the perennial gap that exists between research and practice in various disciplines, including library and information science (LIS), has encouraged practitioners to conduct research to help inform their own practices. EBLIP and reflective practice have also provided impetus for librarians to take up the research mantle. Practitioners have questions that need answering, and often the timelines are tight. Research undertaken by LIS scholars (academics working in university library and information science departments) can take a long time to produce published, accessible results. There is also the potential of such research not being relative to practice. Johannes Balslev, the former Director of Ringsted Public Library in Denmark, wrote about this issue within LIS research, stating that ‘[to] a practitioner with very down-to-earth needs, the research being done at the Royal School of Librarianship at that time seemed rather remote’, and went on to say that if he ‘wanted the gaps to be filled’ he would ‘have to start filling them’ himself (Balslev, 1989, 4). As noted in the first part of this book, EBLIP is a way of working that incorporates research evidence with user preference and professional expertise to aid in decision making. Conducting research can be part of that process should the published research evidence in a particular area be lacking: librarians essentially filling the gaps themselves as practitioner-researchers (see Table 4.4).

    Crumley and Koufogiannakis’ definition of evidence-based librarianship speaks to the notion of librarians conducting research to enhance the evidence base:

    Evidence based librarianship (EBL) is a means to improve the profession of librarianship by asking questions as well as finding, critically appraising and incorporating research evidence from library science (and other disciplines) into daily practice. It also involves encouraging librarians to conduct high quality qualitative and quantitative research. (2002, 62)

    Defining EBLIP as a way to improve the profession of librarianship suggests that conducting research extends further than our own libraries. We have an obligation to the profession and to others in situations similar to our own. Who is going to represent what we do if we don't represent what we do?

  • 7 - Adapt

  • from PART 1 - BACKGROUND AND MODEL
    • By Alison Brettle, Reader in Evidence Based Practice and Director of Post Graduate Research in the School of Nursing, Midwifery and Social Work Research at the University of Salford, UK., Denise Koufogiannakis, Associate University Librarian at the University of Alberta in Edmonton, Alberta, Canada.
  • Edited by Allison Brettle, Denise Koufogiannakis
  • Book:
    Being Evidence Based in Library and Information Practice
    Published by:
    Facet
    Published online:
    08 June 2018
    Print publication:
    31 August 2016, pp 71-78

  • Summary

    The final step in the EBLIP process is to evaluate and determine what impact was made, where gaps remain and where improvement is needed for the next time (Adapt).

    This involves both reflection on the implementation of the decision and ongoing assessment or evaluation to determine whether the decision is working in the longer term (Booth 2004a). Within the literature, this step appears to be the one that has received the least attention, yet if you are going to the trouble of working through the other steps of the EBLIP process you should also take the time to examine whether your decision worked or made a difference. Furthermore, if you are adopting a whole evidence-based approach to your practice, this shouldn't be seen as a final step but as an ongoing part of the cyclical nature of your way of thinking.

    The first reflective step involves thinking about what worked and whether any changes need to be made. New or further questions may also have arisen. The second part of the reflection involves evaluating any service change that was made, so as to determine if it had the desired effect. This can be done via measures of service quality such as benchmarking, performance measures and audit (Booth, 2004a). In reality, the former is more important if the evidence was used for advocacy or to help a stakeholder make a decision about your service, particularly if the decision wasn't a welcome one and led to large service changes. Evaluating service changes to see if they had the desired effect is part of the larger picture relating to quality improvement.

    Reflection on the process

    Reflection is noted as an important continuing professional development activity within EBLIP (Koufogiannakis, 2010b). In the UK, reflection is part of the process required for professional revalidation with CILIP, whereas in the USA the Medical Library Association has recognized the importance of reflection in the research process, challenging its members to ‘build a culture of reflective practice in which the profession's evidence base is routinely used’ (Grefsheim, Rankin, Perry and McKibbon, 2008, 115). Examinations of how librarians can be more reflective in their practice are becoming more prevalent in the literature (Booth, 2010; Forrest, 2008; Sen, 2010), with an easy approach being to think of reflection in terms of What? So What? Now What? (Alcock, 2014).

  • 1 - What is an ontology?

  • David Stuart
  • Book:
    Practical Ontologies for Information Professionals
    Published by:
    Facet
    Published online:
    09 June 2018
    Print publication:
    31 August 2016, pp 1-26

  • Summary

    Introduction

    Today more data and information are being produced and shared than ever before; data is streaming forth from new online social behaviours as well as high-specification digital tools and instruments. If we are to extract the maximum value from this data then we need to make use of the most appropriate tools and technologies. Ontologies, formal representations of knowledge with rich semantic relationships, are one such tool, and the focus of this book.

    This chapter provides an introduction to ontologies, and considers their increasing importance to information professionals. Following a brief overview of the growing information overload and data deluge, the chapter considers the various definitions that have been applied to the term ‘ontology’ and how ontologies differ from associated and overlapping information concepts such as controlled vocabularies, taxonomies, metadata and knowledge bases. Finally, the chapter considers the potential of ontologies for information retrieval and discovering ‘undiscovered public knowledge’, and the role of the librarian in the development, maintenance and curation of ontologies.

    The data deluge and information overload

    It is important to start with an understanding of the changing information landscape, reminding ourselves of why we need new tools and technologies, and why it is no longer acceptable to continue with the way things have always been done. We are awash with a wide variety of information and data, but due to the tools that we are currently using the value of much of the data is going to waste. As John Naisbitt (1984, 17) put it, ‘We are drowning in information, but starved for knowledge’.

    Information is coming from a wide variety of sources. There has been an explosion in the publishing and sharing of text across the whole of the communication spectrum, from the informal to the formal. Traditional formal publications, such as books and journals, have been joined by e-books and e-journals, with new publishing models based on combinations of self-publishing and open access: the number of self-published titles published in the USA rose from 85,468 titles in 2008 to 458,564 titles in 2013 (Bowker, 2014); whilst Chen (2014) estimated that the proportion of articles published in the previous year available as open access had either passed or was very close to 50%.

  • 2 - Data modelling for analysis, discovery and retrieval

  • from PART 1 - ANALYSIS AND RETRIEVAL OF DIGITAL CULTURAL OBJECTS
  • Edited by Allen Foster, Pauline Rafferty
  • Book:
    Managing Digital Cultural Objects
    Published by:
    Facet
    Published online:
    09 June 2018
    Print publication:
    31 July 2016, pp 25-60

  • Summary

    Introduction

    Effective analysis, discovery and retrieval of digital cultural objects are reliant on the underlying data model adopted by an implementation. The manner in which the digital objects have been created will determine whether they can be interrogated for complex analysis. The type and scope of the metadata captured will determine the tools that can be provided for both browsing and searching, and the resulting discovery. The structure and content standards adopted for metadata creation and the formats used for digital object creation will determine whether they can be readily shared across technical implementations. Establishing the aims of the creation and delivery of a collection of digital cultural objects, and modelling the data and metadata requirements to fulfil the established aims, underpin the operational management of digital cultural objects in the custodial environment.

    Defining requirements

    Data modelling should not actually focus on the data to be delivered in the first instance. Rather it starts with two fundamental questions which will drive the creation of cultural digital objects and the technical specification for delivering them:

  • What audience is the material for?

  • How will the identified audience use the material?

    • It is only after a requirements-gathering exercise to answer these questions that an initiative should start to think about the types of digital object that will be created and supported, the structure and organization of these objects and the functionality and services that will be provided to enable analysis, discovery and retrieval (Shen et al., 2005).

    Requirements gathering can be a complex process that involves looking closely at the needs of the proposed users and the wider social, personnel and technical issues. The design of a requirements-gathering exercise can be informed through the use of conceptual models which describe the wider functions of a digital library or digital repository and consider the actors as well as the data.

    The OAIS Reference Model

    The OAIS (Open Archival Information System) Reference Model (ISO 14721) (Consultative Committee for Space Data System Practices, 2012) is widely used as a framework for modelling a digital collection's technical and organizational requirements and conformance with the standard regarded as best practice, especially if digital objects are to be managed over the long term.

  • 9 - Film retrieval on the web: sharing, naming, access and discovery

  • from PART 3 - SOCIAL NETWORKING AND DIGITAL CULTURAL OBJECTS
  • Edited by Allen Foster, Pauline Rafferty
  • Book:
    Managing Digital Cultural Objects
    Published by:
    Facet
    Published online:
    09 June 2018
    Print publication:
    31 July 2016, pp 199-218

  • Summary

    Introduction

    Non-textual resources can prove to be elusive targets on the web. Searching for a specific film or video often requires both fortitude and perseverance because of the multi-layered complexity of these resources. According to Turner (2009), moving image materials are ill-served by the prevalent systems of organization designed for print materials. Neal (2012, 5) quoting from the arguments of O'Connor and Wyatt (2004) notes, ‘words are not pictures and vice versa’. Far too often, the experience of searching for moving images is strikingly similar to the plot of All Is Lost (Chandor et al., 2013), starring Robert Redford. Featuring a solitary and nearly silent protagonist facing a series of nightmarish and unfathomable disasters with heroic resilience, this film celebrates the triumph of the human spirit.

    Providers of digital cultural objects face increasing pressure to provide seamless networked access to their collections and a growing sense of urgency to create interoperable, exchangeable metadata. Amidst this pressure, digital cultural asset managers are compelled to develop and co-ordinate standards that foster interoperability and remote access (Turner, 2009). The current landscape of web access to film and video is most often provided through surrogate representations (keywords, abstracts, etc.) in both free or subscription databases and catalogues, or directly via free or fee streaming film sites or film study portals, which often combine access with richly detailed metadata and associated content (Smeaton, 2004; Oberhelman, 2014).

    Background

    This chapter extends a previous study (La Barre and Cordeiro, 2012) that called for the creation of more robust access and discovery interfaces for films across a variety of digital platforms. It engages with both technical and strategic issues relating to film retrieval on the web by touching on issues such as distributed data structures, linked data and controlled and uncontrolled access points. A case study on the source of subject and authority metadata for films and the discovery and access structures for users across several different web environments – including YouTube, which enables ‘people to discover, watch and share originally-created videos’ (www.youtube/yt/about) and the Internet Movie Database (IMDb), ‘a searchable database of more than 100 million data items including more than 2 million movies’ (www.imdb.com/about) – frames our discussion.

  • 1 - Managing, searching and finding digital cultural objects: putting it in context

  • from PART 1 - ANALYSIS AND RETRIEVAL OF DIGITAL CULTURAL OBJECTS
  • Edited by Allen Foster, Pauline Rafferty
  • Book:
    Managing Digital Cultural Objects
    Published by:
    Facet
    Published online:
    09 June 2018
    Print publication:
    31 July 2016, pp 3-24

  • Summary

    Introduction

    The challenges of managing digital cultural objects have been considered by many academics in the fields of information sciences, archives, media and communications and computer sciences, to name but a few stakeholder disciplines (see for example Besser, 1997; Minzter, 1999; Gilliland-Swetland, 2000; Srinivasan et al., 2009; Beaudoin, 2012; Christodoulakis, 2014). Challenges are not only technical but often related to the semantic and communicative aspects of cultural objects. This introductory chapter seeks to contextualize the major themes relating to managing, searching, and finding digital cultural objects which are explored in this book by considering some of the broader issues relating to communication and practice. It explores the retrieval of digital cultural documentation with reference to communication and cultural theory, specifically social semiotics, and it will also explore semantic approaches to indexing and approaches which go beyond the conventional, such as emotional indexing and storytelling as indexing, before moving on to consider aspects of digital cultural collections, particularly crowdsourcing in conventional cultural memory insti - tutions and amateur collections. That cultural documentation brings with it certain semantic and interpretative challenges has long been recognized in the literature (see for example, Langridge's 1989 book on subject analysis, which examines questions relating to interpretation and meaning and remains a classic in the field, and Rafferty and Hidderley's 2005 Indexing Multimedia and Creative Works, which includes some theoretical discussion relating to the problems of interpretation of nontextual information). Kim Veltman (2006) outlines the challenges of developing an information retrieval and knowledge organization framework for representing and facilitating access to digital cultural documentation in the context of the semantic web. Veltman was writing at a time when the development of the putative semantic web was beginning to be discussed, and the scholarly literature surrounding the semantic web suggested that knowledge organization systems such as ontologies and taxonomies would be crucial to facilitating the development of the semantic web (see, for example, Weller, 2010 and Morville, 2005). Many of the issues that Veltman raised in that paper are still useful in forming a framework through which to examine digital cultural information retrieval systems.

  • 5 - Managing and preserving digital collections at the British Library

  • from PART 2 - DIGITIZATION PROJECTS IN LIBRARIES, ARCHIVES AND MUSEUMS: CASE STUDIES
  • Edited by Allen Foster, Pauline Rafferty
  • Book:
    Managing Digital Cultural Objects
    Published by:
    Facet
    Published online:
    09 June 2018
    Print publication:
    31 July 2016, pp 111-128

  • Summary

    Introduction

    The British Library is one of the greatest research libraries in the world, serving business and industry, researchers and academics, in the UK and worldwide. Our collection items range from Chinese oracle bones over 3000 years old, the first edition of The Times in 1788 and the Magna Carta, to Beatles’ manuscripts, modern patents, maps and journal titles. Alongside these physical artefacts we hold an increasing amount of digital material. Digitization of our collection began as early as the 1990s, with the creation of digital surrogates of Library treasures such as the Beowulf manuscript, the Lindisfarne Gospels, Shakespeare Folios, and musical manuscripts from Handel, Bach and Mozart. More recently we have entered the world of mass digitization projects: for example, the Google Books project and the Brightsolid newspaper digitization programme. At the same time we have acquired an increasing amount of born-digital content and we now have a sizable collection of such content, ranging from digital audio/video recordings and digital maps to personal digital archives, e-journals and archived websites. In all, we estimate we already have over 300 terabytes of collection content – or over 12 million items – stored in our long-term digital library system, with more awaiting ingest. The rate of acquisition has significantly increased since the onset of nonprint legal deposit legislation in 2013, with around 4.8 million websites, 120,000 e-journal articles and 12,000 e-books collected in the first year alone. Current estimates predict that the total size of our collection will increase massively in future years to around 5 petabytes by 2020.

    With acquisition comes responsibility. We must be able to adequately preserve our collection content for access by future users, regardless of acquisition form or format, and despite inevitable changes in not only storage media and hardware but also file formats, operating systems and software applications. We must ensure that bits do not rot and that the intellectual content of our digital collections remains available to users for the next 20, 50, 100, 200 years and beyond. For digital collections this requires investment in collection management and preservation practices across the entire lifecycle, from the point of acquisition onwards.

  • 8 - Searching and classifying affinities in a web music collection

  • from PART 3 - SOCIAL NETWORKING AND DIGITAL CULTURAL OBJECTS
  • Edited by Allen Foster, Pauline Rafferty
  • Book:
    Managing Digital Cultural Objects
    Published by:
    Facet
    Published online:
    09 June 2018
    Print publication:
    31 July 2016, pp 183-198

  • Summary

    Introduction

    Online music libraries available on the web contain a large amount of audio content that is usually the result of digitization of analogue recordings or the direct acquisition of digital sources. The acquisition process is carried out by several persons and may last a number of years, thus it is likely that the same or similar audio content is present in different versions. This chapter describes a number of possible similarities, which are called affinities, and presents a methodology to detect the kind of affinity from the automatic analysis and matching of the audio content. The automatic detection of duplicates and nearduplicates of textual documents has become an important research trend after the development of the web. In fact the same textual information may be contained, with minor modifications, in several web pages maintained by different organizations or individuals. One of the reasons why a large number of near-duplicate pages exists can be tracked back to a general tendency on the web to underestimate the importance of copyright. In fact, near duplicate identification also has important applications in patent analysis and in plagiarism detection.

    With the increasing availability of multimedia content on the web and in cloud services, duplicate detection is also gaining relevance for media other than text, in particular to help manage large video collections and to improve image retrieval tasks. Most of these approaches are based on the concept of fingerprinting as a way to reduce the very large scale of the problem. The basic idea of fingerprinting is that multimedia objects can be represented by a compact array of features, with a size orders of magnitude smaller than the original object, allowing feature indexing and in general faster processing. Moreover, a robust fingerprinting algorithm is able to extract features that are mostly related to human perception, in order to identify duplicates of a given multimedia object even when some post-processing has been applied.

    The approach can also be applied to the music domain, and in fact acoustic fingerprinting is a well-known technique commercially exploited for music identification, which is at the basis of Shazam!, one of the most popular music services on the Internet, and of many other systems, such as the MusicID software patented by Gracenote and the AudioID software used by MusicBrainz based on an application of computer vision.

Page 125 of 293