Proceedings of the International Conference on Scientific Information Two Volumes (1959) / Chapter Skim
Currently Skimming:
Conventional and Inverted Grouping of Codes for Chemical Data
Conventional and Inverted Grouping of Codes for Chemical Data
Pages 671-686
The Chapter Skim interface presents what we've algorithmically identified as the most significant single chunk of text within every page in the chapter.
Select key terms on the right to highlight them within pages of the chapter.
From page 671... ...
cards, interior-punched carcis, Microcards, Uniterm cards, Batten carcls, magnetic tapes, or even conventional alphabetical or classed catalogs may differ from one another in cost, ease of storage, ease of retrieval, size, complexity, etc., but they are alike with respect to basic potentialities for handling different types of literature searches. For equal amounts of coding space all systems can enter an equal amount of information and for an equal number of needles, reading heads or electronic circuitry, all physical systems deliver the identical product for any search (2~.
|
From page 672... ...
It differs from most Batten systems In its use of a driD for multiple entering rather than a punch which enters codes one card at a time. The Patent Office system utilizes a standard IBM keypunch and a Census Bureau multicolumn sorter which is a modified IBM 101 electronic statistical FIGURE 1.
|
From page 673... ...
A summary of the Patent Office system The Patent Office system covers 2350 steroid patents which include 900 duplicates or cross-references leaving 1450 patents to be coded. A steroid compound, the subject of a steroid patent, is a complicated chemical structure.
|
From page 674... ...
l 674 Comparative Characteristics of Existing Systems AREA 4 o 11 12 22 1 2 ~5 6 7 8~ 10 11 12 13 14 15 166761R 19 An 91 or allo 22 ~2~ 7 8 9 10~12 13 14 15 16~18 19 20 21 ~ hi -C - C- 22 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 _ 7 8 CH3 22 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 10 CN 22 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 11 12 COOH or COOR 22 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19~21 13 14 -C- SUb 22 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 15 16 -H 22 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 2.1 NH2 or N ' 17 18 22 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 O H 22 1 2~ 5 6 7 8 9 10~12 13 14 15 16~18 19 20 _ =0 22 1 2~ 5 6 7 8 9 10~12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19~21 ...
|
From page 675... ...
MILLER et a1. Conventional ~ I?
|
From page 676... ...
6. The random filing of cards within groups made possible by the use of Radex tabbed cards, is not integral to all -uses of the Matrex system; nor restricted to it, but in this application to positions of descriptors it serves to decrease materially the time required to select and refile cards.
|
From page 677... ...
4) 9 which can be considered item 1, is entered by selecting from the Matrex file =, 4, 9, 17; a 1, 3, 5, 11, 17; COOH 20; etc.
|
From page 678... ...
6 which compares a conventionally grouped Zatocoding system with an inverted group of codes having the same coding space. The identity of coding between conventional grouping and inverted group~ng Is secured by matching the number of code positions on the Zatocard to the number of cards in the inverted system.
|
From page 679... ...
However, the magnitudes are sufficiently revealing for our purposes. Basis for comparison In order to arrive at some basis for comparison ofthe Matrex and punched card apparatus for searching steroid patents, the Patent Office staff provided ten hypothetical queries and ten input problems were derived from 10 randomly ~ ~ indexing and Actually, the selected patent cards.
|
From page 680... ...
The Patent Office supplied a blanket figure of 6~ minutes time to present the answer cards to any query of the deck of 1556 patent cards on the Census Bureau's multicolumn sorter. We can assume that somewhat more time would be required on a standard IBM 101 machine.
|
From page 681... ...
A print-out from punched cards could be achieved much faster with a tabulator, but the cost of the tabulator must be reckoned. The steroid punched card deck need not be maintained in numerical order for search purposes, but the answer cards should be sorted for read-out purposes.
|
From page 682... ...
(This happens to be the limit of a cheap Matrex device; more sophisticated Matrex devices can be had for collections of 40,000 (for between $1000 and $1500~. The input costs of either punched cards or Matrex are not affected by growth, if we ignore the relatively low cost of tabulating care!
|
From page 683... ...
.80 Table 4 summarizes the times involved in entering material and searching the present collection of 1556 steroid patents and a hypothetical collection of 10,000: TABLE 4 Time for answer presentation per query, minutes Entry time Collection of Col,'ection of per patent, minutes 1556 patents 10,000 patents Matrex device 3.5 1.8 1.8 Type 82 sorter 2 7.2 32.4 IBM 101 2 6.5 41.8 ACKNOWLEDGMENT The authors are indebted to Mr. Don Andrews and Mr.
|
From page 684... ...
Patent Office Research and Development Report No.
|
From page 685... ...
MILLER et al. Conventional ~ Inverted Grouping of Codes Chemical Data 685 Query 7 8 9 0 Column Row 36 35 20 40 3 22 60 60 60 19 22 20 20 1 22 21 40 67 20 67 60 60 60 9 6 1 4 12 5 11 7 5 o 3 12 4 11 3 6 5 7 4 5 o Total Drop out cards handled Time 79 72 26 3 answers 1739 5:59 439 278 84 83 79 78 78 69 answers 2744 8:73 531 402 364 345 345 344 66 35 18 17 15 15 15 answers answers 3887 8:49 1737 6:22
|
Key Terms
This material may be derived from roughly machine-read images, and so is provided only to facilitate research.
More
information on Chapter Skim is available.