共查询到20条相似文献，搜索用时 296 毫秒
1.
论文通过TAIR、HKIR和中国科学院机构知识库服务网格等网站访问,对中国大陆、香港和台湾地区的机构知识库现状进行实证调查,比较分析三地机构知识库的特点和优缺点,对机构知识库建设提出合理化建议。 相似文献
2.
[目的/意义]机构知识库集成服务系统是机构知识库发展的必然趋势,可以实现更大范围的知识产出保存和共享,对于构建科研信息基础设施、促进学术交流和知识创新有着重要意义。 [方法/过程]对国内外已有的机构知识库集成服务系统进行调研,对系统的主要功能、关键技术及开发方式进行比较分析,并基于开源软件eXtensible Catalog快速构建一个中文开放知识库集成服务系统。[结果/结论] 建立起一个覆盖中国科学院、国内高校、港澳台高校开放机构知识库的集成服务系统,可对促进我国学术资源开放获取与机构知识库的建设发展起到一定的推动作用。 相似文献
3.
CALIS机构知识库：建设与推广、反思与展望 总被引：4，自引：0，他引：4
CALIS三期“机构知识库建设及推广项目”,旨在揭示和推广我国高校的学术资源和学术成果,帮助高校发布、共享和保护已形成的知识、科学和文化遗产的数字化资源,并通过聚集和开放获取增加其附加值,进一步促进学术交流.项目建设的目标是建立“分散部署、集中揭示”的全国高校机构知识库.本文从三个方面介绍项目建设情况:①调研、准备和启动等组织实施工作;②技术路线,IR系统功能和服务方式等建设方案;③系统开发,应用部署,标准规范制定,机构知识库资源建设以及机构知识库推广宣传等建设成果.最后就政策支持、模式定位、内容甄选、宣传推广、技术平台等方面提出问题并进行反思和展望. 相似文献
4.
采取文献综述、网站跟踪观测和数据汇总分析方法，从建设动因与目标理念、建设策略与推进措施、建设进度与运行状态3个方面对中国科学院系统和高校机构知识库建设现状作比较研究，归纳出两大系统机构知识库建设特点和经验，提出两大系统共同合作，形成我国综合型机构知识库网格建设与发展格局，推进国家层面机构知识库系统建设的建议。 相似文献
5.
图书馆机构知识库是基于信息资源的多元化、获取渠道的多样化和网络技术的广泛应用而得以不断发展.从图书馆服务方式的发展和服务范围的扩大这两方面来探讨图书馆建设机构知识库的必要性,从发展模式、存储资源和服务功能三方面分析国内高校机构知识库的发展现状,以体现机构知识库建设的现实意义,并从平台建设、内容建设、制度建设、技术建设四个层面提出国内高校机构知识库建设模式的可行性发展路径. 相似文献
6.
联盟机构知识库是机构知识库建设与发展的趋势,文章介绍与研究了芬兰Doria和Theseus联盟机构知识库建设模式、运行机制及服务效果,提出了我国在行业/系统及区域联盟机构知识库建设与可持续发展中应借鉴的经验与受到的启示。 相似文献
7.
8.
我国机构知识库建设面临着建设数量少、内容不健全、宣传不到位、服务不充分等困境。为推动我国机构知识库的可持续发展,必须确立典型机构知识库引领机制,发展机构知识库联盟;制定强制性自存储政策,增加资源数量;加强对机构知识库的宣传,提高用户认知度;扩展机构知识库服务功能,加强个性化服务。 相似文献
9.
[目的/意义]建立面向科研管理的机构知识库,通过对机构知识库的知识资源进行实时储存、追踪、统计分析,为科研管理提供支撑服务,发挥机构知识库在科研评价、科研追踪、科研监管、科研决策及科研创新等方面的作用。[方法/过程]通过分析科研管理对机构知识库的现实需求,了解目前机构知识库的现实功能及其不足,进而提出将机构知识库和科研管理相结合的机构知识库建设方案。将机构知识库融入科研管理流程,通过强制呈缴政策、利益保护政策等政策支持,以及查重、查新机制,绩效评价中的机构知识库承认机制,分类管理、分级共享机制以及知识产权保护机制等机制建设,确保机构知识库融入科研过程,实现对科研管理和科研创新的全面支撑。[结果/结论]将机构知识库建设放在整个科研环境中,实现机构知识库与科研管理的有机结合,为科研管理提供支撑服务。 相似文献
10.
基于对国内外机构知识库发展现状的认识,揭示出机构知识库的数字资源存储与共享、拓展与增值服务、知识服务联盟等基本功能,进而从知识服务的角度列举建设机构知识库服务体系的基础、核心、目标、方向和方法. 相似文献
11.
介绍了机构知识库的发展概况。阐述了高校图书馆在建设机构知识库中的优势,对高等院校图书馆在机构知识库的建设中的作用及建设过程中遇到的问题进行了探讨,提出了对高校图书馆建设机构知识库的设想。 相似文献
12.
13.
我国机构知识库建设取得一定的成果,但通过对OpenDOAR的数据分析和对比发现,我国在全球机构知
识库中的影响力还比较小。文章提出了一个与科学数据库相结合的IR建设新框架,并对功能和特点进行了介绍。IR建
设需要继续紧密结合科研实际需求,补充和挖掘科学数据和特色资源,加强相关学科的信息资源整合,特别是科学数
据库,拓展服务方式,提高服务的深度和专业性。 相似文献
14.
基于Plone内容管理系统的机构虚拟工作平台构建*——以中国科学院学位论文虚拟工作平台建设为例 总被引：2，自引：0，他引：2
阐述Plone内容管理系统的基本特征，并介绍在学位论文管理工作中如何利用Plone内容管理系统搭建虚拟工作平台,实践表明对内容合理组织和分类、设计有效的工作流以及合理配置用户权限是虚拟工作平台构建的关键。 相似文献
15.
16.
Professors contribute to Institutional Repositories (IRs) to make their materials widely accessible in keeping with the benefits of Open Access. However, universities' commitment to IRs depends on building trust with faculty and solving copyright concerns. Digital preservation and copyright management in IRs should be strengthened to increase faculty participation. 相似文献
17.
����ͼ����Ŀ���ݿ⽨���ǰ�ڹ��������������˼�� 总被引：1，自引：0，他引：1
??The development of computer and coramunication technology creates a favourabis condition for the net- working of documentation and information work. The preliminary study and some preparation work have been made by Lanzhou Documentation and Information Cxntre, CAS according to the Development Project (from now to the year 2000) for the construction of the Catalogs database of monographies in western languages in recent years. The work done is sumrnerixed and the issues are presented. 相似文献
18.
Shampa Paul 《International Information and Library Review》2012,44(4):194-201
The Information Age is characterized by new ways of information generation, managing, and dissemination because of the use of information and communication technology (ICT) (Moahi, 2003; Paul, 2007). Institutional Repositories (IRs) play a fundamental role in centralizing, preserving, and making accessible institution's intellectual capital and, at the same time, they form part of a global system of distributed and interoperable repositories that provide the foundation for a new disaggregated model of scholarly publishing (Johnson, 2002; Nagahban, 2010). A study of nine libraries in the National Capital Region of India was conducted to: identify benefits of IRs, learn the satisfaction level of users with respect to IR facilities, identify the incentives for publication in IRs, and identify the appropriate policies to be adopted by institutions for implementing IRs. The results of the responses from the 496 respondents indicate that: 1) Most Faculty members and Research scholars in this study indicated that they do not publish their research in IRs. 2) Opinions about benefits of IRs are user-specific. For instance, a substantially large percentage of those Faculty members and Research scholars in the study who do use IRs are Most satisfied with potential benefits of IR while a relatively higher percentage of Students fall in the Satisfied category. 3) The benefits of IRs ranked most highly, although this varied by the different user groups was wider readership. Students ranked this and "quality aspect" – the opportunity to improve the quality of one's work through the provision of feedback from other researchers. 4) A serious concern about publishing in IRs is the potential for plagiarism and overall lower control over one's work. A second concern is the potential loss of content in IRs, which are often not archived as well as scholarly journals are. The findings suggest that institutions need to give due attention to policies related to two aspects of publication, especially those related to quality and copyright issues and to the academic value of research output. Other policy-related topics include citation in other publication with due acknowledgement, inclusion in indexing systems for retrieval, interoperability with other IRs, and Permanent storage. 相似文献
19.
Shampa Paul 《International Information and Library Review》2013,45(4):194-201
The Information Age is characterized by new ways of information generation, managing, and dissemination because of the use of information and communication technology (ICT) (Moahi, 2003; Paul, 2007). Institutional Repositories (IRs) play a fundamental role in centralizing, preserving, and making accessible institution's intellectual capital and, at the same time, they form part of a global system of distributed and interoperable repositories that provide the foundation for a new disaggregated model of scholarly publishing (Johnson, 2002; Nagahban, 2010). A study of nine libraries in the National Capital Region of India was conducted to: identify benefits of IRs, learn the satisfaction level of users with respect to IR facilities, identify the incentives for publication in IRs, and identify the appropriate policies to be adopted by institutions for implementing IRs. The results of the responses from the 496 respondents indicate that: 1) Most Faculty members and Research scholars in this study indicated that they do not publish their research in IRs. 2) Opinions about benefits of IRs are user-specific. For instance, a substantially large percentage of those Faculty members and Research scholars in the study who do use IRs are Most satisfied with potential benefits of IR while a relatively higher percentage of Students fall in the Satisfied category. 3) The benefits of IRs ranked most highly, although this varied by the different user groups was wider readership. Students ranked this and "quality aspect" – the opportunity to improve the quality of one's work through the provision of feedback from other researchers. 4) A serious concern about publishing in IRs is the potential for plagiarism and overall lower control over one's work. A second concern is the potential loss of content in IRs, which are often not archived as well as scholarly journals are. The findings suggest that institutions need to give due attention to policies related to two aspects of publication, especially those related to quality and copyright issues and to the academic value of research output. Other policy-related topics include citation in other publication with due acknowledgement, inclusion in indexing systems for retrieval, interoperability with other IRs, and Permanent storage. 相似文献
20.
Alice A. Bamigbola Airen E. Adetimirin 《International Information and Library Review》2020,52(2):95-107
AbstractInstitutional repositories (IRs) present platform to disseminate research findings to complement the traditional scholarly communication model. The use of IRs is beneficial to authors, host institutions, libraries and society at large. Despite the numerous benefits of IRs, there is low deposit of scholarly works by lecturers and the investment on IRs seems to be a waste. This study examined determinants of perceived ease of use (PEOU) of IRs by lecturers in Nigerian universities. A survey of lecturers received 857 respondents. Awareness, anchor and adjustment factors were found to be determinants of PEOU of Institutional repositories by lecturers in Nigerian Universities. 相似文献