lazykoblog   occasional musings about knowledge organization

ISKO 17 (2022) was held in Aalborg, Denmark from 6-8 July 2022. It was the second conference planned for Aalborg, and indeed, ISKO 16 was centered there but became a virtual conference because of the COVID-19 pandemic. The conference was titled Knowledge Organization across Disciplines, Domains, Services & Technologies and the proceedings were published by Ergon Verlag (ISKO 2022). Like earlier analyses in the “ISKO’s Bookshelf” series, the proceedings have not been indexed by either Clarivate of Scopus so the work reported here is the result of manual data-gathering. Also, like earlier volumes of ISKO proceedings, the editing is not uniform, particularly with regard to the references, which makes sorting difficult.

The proceedings contain 24 full papers, six short papers and three posters—33 contributions and therefore much less than has been typical of ISKO international conferences. We can assume this is another artifact of the pandemic, which was just beginning to ease in the summer of 2022. Only nine presentations are by a single author; all the rest are collaborative, which is a new sign of the hardening of the science of knowledge organization. Table 6 shows the countries of affiliation of the authors.

Table 6. ISKO 17 countries of affiliation of authors.

Brazil, USA and Canada predominate, and this is consistent with the series of proceedings analyzed above.

The number of references per presentation ranges from 1 to 47 with a mean of 23.75, a median of 22 and a mode of 21. This is quite different from all earlier ISKO conferences, suggesting perhaps a more humanistic bent to the conference, in opposition to the co-authorship data. Date of work cited ranged from 1548 to 2022. The mean age of work cited is 19.5 years (median 10, mode 5). This is the highest mean age of cited work (a humanistic trait) and the lowest mode (a hard science trait) (see Table 1 above).

As it pertains to “citation image,” there were 88 authors cited more than once; the top of the tier is shown in Table 7.

Table 7. ISKO 17 authors most cited.

As usual, Hjørland is cited the most. Beghtol and Smiraglia are among the usual suspects from before, and we can see that Szostak (see Table 5 above) has been moving up the list for several conferences. The other names are new to the list of most cited. So this tells us two things: first, that no matter how many scholars advance the science KO authors cannot make themselves stop citing the now very outdated work of Hjørland, and second, that the citation “image” of ISKO has changed significantly in 2022 to include a very many new scholars.

ISKO 17 is the smallest ISKO international conference with only 33 contributions. Brazil, the USA and Canada predominate among countries of author affiliation. The majority are collaborative, which points to empirical science. But, the number of references is quite large and they are quite older than typical, pointing to humanistic epistemologies. The citation image continues to be dominated by Hjørland, but there are several new names as well, indicating a shift in citation image in ISKO 17.

*Excerpted from: Smiraglia. Richard P. 2022. “ISKO’s Bookshelf 2022: Mysteries of a Pandemic, Part 1.” IKOS Bulletin 4, no.2: 54-64.

ISKO 17 (2022) was held in Aalborg, Denmark from 6-8 July 2022. It was the second conference planned for Aalborg, and indeed, ISKO 16 was centered there but became a virtual conference because of the COVID-19 pandemic. The conference was titled Knowledge Organization across Disciplines, Domains, Services & Technologies and the proceedings were published by Ergon Verlag (ISKO 2022). Like earlier analyses in the “ISKO’s Bookshelf” series, the proceedings have not been indexed by either Clarivate of Scopus so the work reported here is the result of manual data-gathering. Also, like earlier volumes of ISKO proceedings, the editing is not uniform, particularly with regard to the references, which makes sorting difficult. An excel file with the basic citation data is attached to this report.

The proceedings contain 24 full papers, six short papers and three posters—33 contributions and therefore much less than has been typical of ISKO international conferences. We can assume this is another artifact of the pandemic, which was just beginning to ease in the summer of 2022. Only nine presentations are by a single author; all the rest are collaborative, which is a new sign of the hardening of the science of knowledge organization. Table 6 shows the countries of affiliation of the authors.

Table 6. ISKO 17 countries of affiliation of authors.

Brazil, USA and Canada predominate, and this is consistent with the series of proceedings analyzed above.

The number of references per presentation ranges from 1 to 47 with a mean of 23.75, a median of 22 and a mode of 21. This is quite different from all earlier ISKO conferences, suggesting perhaps a more humanistic bent to the conference, in opposition to the co-authorship data. Date of work cited ranged from 1548 to 2022. The mean age of work cited is 19.5 years (median 10, mode 5). This is the highest mean age of cited work (a humanistic trait) and the lowest mode (a hard science trait) (see Table 1 above).

As it pertains to “citation image,” there were 88 authors cited more than once; the top of the tier is shown in Table 7.

Table 7. ISKO 17 authors most cited.

As usual, Hjørland is cited the most. Beghtol and Smiraglia are among the usual suspects from before, and we can see that Szostak (see Table 5 above) has been moving up the list for several conferences. The other names are new to the list of most cited. So this tells us two things: first, that no matter how many scholars advance the science KO authors cannot make themselves stop citing the now very outdated work of Hjørland, and second, that the citation “image” of ISKO has changed significantly in 2022 to include a very many new scholars.

*Excerpted from: Smiraglia. Richard P. 2022. “ISKO’s Bookshelf 2022: Mysteries of a Pandemic, Part 1.” IKOS Bulletin 4, no.2: 54-64.

People ask me all the time what our institute “does.” When I say simply “research” I usually get a blank stare for a response. After all, what kind of “research” could there be in the organization of knowledge? And for that matter, what “is” the structure of knowledge—how could there be research into that?

Fortunately, the world press reports research about the order and structure of knowledge all the time. For example, in the October 25^th (2019) Economist there was a report about how a meta-analysis of museum research demonstrated there were more male specimens than female in museum collections used for research, and therefore, that the results of the reported research were not (as we might have it) ontologically sound. Meanwhile, on television 60 Minutes reported on November 24^th 2019 that specific concepts are recognizable by electrical patterns in the brains of humans who embrace them. In other words, a biometric sign that specific meanings actually do, despite the influence of phenomenological philosophies and epistemological stances, cause commonality of understanding across the human species. Both of these studies are meta-analyses of prior empirical studies—from simple descriptive research to experimentation—thus both contribute to the growth of the theory of the order of knowledge, and in the latter case its structure as well.

In Elements of Knowledge Organization (2014, 7) I wrote: “At the most basic level, theory is a frequently‐tested (and thereby affirmed) statement of the interacting requirements of a phenomenon. In empirical research, theory is both the accumulated wisdom of the paradigm from which hypotheses are cast and the constant reaccumulation that occurs as each hypothesis is tested” and “theory exists in domains where a large quantity of research has been very productive at generating workable explanations and also at identifying inadequate or erroneous statements.” The growth of theory requires both large numbers of replicable research studies, and meta-analyses of those studies that demonstrate both results and gaps. In knowledge organization, it is critical that studies of ontological spaces be conducted, replicated and analyzed across studies and across time. In post-modern knowledge organization, which is domain-centric, this means analysis of specific concepts within specific domain ontologies. But we also have in meta-analysis the opportunity to compare ontological structures, which can themselves be classified, compared and tested, to understand how domains are or are not comparable. These are the goals of our institute. We work with the theoretical underpinnings of working knowledge organization applications. But we do so at a meta-level, seeking to understand both the ontological priorities of a domain and the ontical structures of its conceptual knowledge base.

My last two editorials in Knowledge Organizationwere pleas for empirical research. In (2017) I pleaded with the community to take up replication and theory building. On ISKO conference program committees (both regional and international) referees frequently criticize research with the phrase “we have seen this before.” But, of course, replication is critical to create reliability across results of different studies. Until we have replications of the same data from the same methodologies and even the same data from diverse methodologies, until then we cannot have faith in the reliability of our theoretical constructs. Empirical science relies on theoretical statements that indicate the probability of occurrence more than 99% of the time. Although systems for the organization of knowledge are as old as civilization itself, the empirical study of KO stems only from the past half century. In 2015 (31-33) I analyzed the existing domain analytical studies; at that time only a few very broad domains (archives, image searching, LGBT, physics and social media) had been studied 3 times, and only music (an immense domain) had been studied 4 times, and KO itself had been studied 22 times. It is critical to deepen the understanding of domain ontologies if we are to grow theory of both knowledge organization and knowledge structure.

In my most recent editorial (2020) I tried to point to increasingly problematic behavior of scholars in KO with little or only casual regard to referencing. References often are crafted rather than extracted from source publications. Authors often cite works that have not been read. I consider this is a form of intellectual dishonesty that pushes ethical boundaries. The importance of replication extends to the evidentiary component of every published study—if the sources cannot be consulted in replication how can we have confidence in published results?

The role of IKOS then is to meet the demand for empirical KO by pursuing in real time the work of empirical research in domain ontologies and ontical structures. To that end we first took up a meta-analysis of studies of KO. The results of that study are now compiled in our first technical report (IKOS 2020). Two products of that study are visible on our website in the form of the corpus bibliography (https://knoworg.org/meta-analysis-of-the-knowledge-organization-domain-corpus-bibliography/) and a dynamic Formal Taxonomy of Knowledge Organization (https://knoworg.org/a-formal-taxonomy-of-knowledge-organization-version-1-0/).

In late 2019 we tackled the phenomena of music for a phenomenon-based classification. The result of that work, which is still underway, will include new facets for medium of performance, and form and genre. An exciting development will be a facet for audiography, derived from meta-analysis of empirical studies of music information retrieval (Szostak and Smiraglia 2020). This facet will include details of capture, production and dissemination, and user purpose and emotion.

In 2020 it is our intention to tackle homosexual nomenclatures. We also have begun to work on the domain of nursing information behavior, basing our initial analysis on the 2005 dissertation by Edmund Pajarillo. A teaser visualization of simple phrases appears in Figure 1.

We can see here the potential outline of facets for a taxonomy—geographic health, information leads, nursing process, information behavior, information resources. We will work to grow that taxonomy as we are able.

In all of this research we are doing what we can to contribute—to give back—through research by meeting the demand for empirical knowledge organization.

References

IKOS (Institute for Knowledge Organization and Structure, Inc.). 2020. Technical Report: Meta-Analysis of Knowledge Organization as a Domain. IKOS Technical Reports Series no. 1. Lake Oswego, OR: IKOS.

Pajarillo, Edmund J.Y. 2005. “Contextual Perspectives of Information for Home Care Nurses: Towards a Framework of Nursing Information Behavior (NIB).” PhD diss., Long Island University.

 “Scientists are using MRI scans to reveal the physical makeup of our thoughts and feelings.” 60 Minutes November 24, 2019. https://www.cbsnews.com/news/functional-magnetic-resonance-imaging-computer-analysis-read-thoughts-60-minutes-2019-11-24/

“Sexual Selection: Collections of Animals Favour Male over Female Specimens.” Economist October 25^th (2019): 74. https://www.economist.com/science-and-technology/2019/10/26/why-museums-animal-collections-favour-males

Smiraglia, Richard P. 2014. The Elements of Knowledge Organization. Cham: Springer.

Smiraglia, Richard P. 2015. Domain Analysis for Knowledge Organization: Tools for Ontology Extraction. Chandos InformationProfessional Series. Oxford: Elsevier/Chandos.

Smiraglia, Richard P. 2017. “Replication and Accumulation in Knowledge Organization—An Editorial.” Knowledge Organization 44: 315-17. 

Smiraglia, Richard P. 2020. “Referencing as Evidentiary: An Editorial.” Knowledge Organization 47: 4-12. doi:10.5771/0943-7444-2020-1-4

Szostak, Rick and Richard P. Smiraglia. 2020. “Identifying and Classifying the Phenomena of Music.” In Linking Knowledge: Linked Open Data for Knowledge Organization and Visualization, ed. Richard P. Smiraglia and Andrea Scharnhorst. Baden-Baden: Ergon Verlag, 2021, 143-48. Also in Knowledge Organization at the Interface: Proceedings of the Sixteenth International ISKO Conference, 2020, Aalborg, Denmark, ed. Marianne Lykke, Taja Svarre, Mette Skov and Daniel MartÍnez-Ávila. Advances in Knowledge Organization 17. Baden-Baden: Ergon Verlag, 421-27.

*Published in print as: Smiraglia, Richard P. 2020. “The Demand for Empirical Knowledge Organization.” IKOS Bulletin 2, no.1 : 8-10.

“Iconic .…” According to the Oxford English Dictionary Online the word means “Of or pertaining to an icon, image, figure, or representation; of the nature of a portrait.” The first usage reported there was in 1656. OED also has variant definitions for “use in worship” and Semiotics. Ah, there we are: … “pertaining to or resembling an icon” (first usage reported in 1939. And finally: “designating a person or thing regarded as representative of a culture or movement; important or influential in a particular (cultural) context.” WordNet has: “relating to or having the characteristics of an icon.”

We all know, I hope, what an icon is. I have many that I have collected on my travels to Crete. In Orthodox spirituality, these icons are pathways to prayer. It is a bit difficult to explain, but the idea is that in praying with an icon (by focusing on the figures in meditative prayer) the saint in the icon is able to enter your consciousness and become a vector for your prayer.

The word has become ubiquitous in the news these days, to mean “emblematic.” I have to laugh, because once not so long ago when I used the word “iconic” in a manuscript I was told it would not be understood by LIS readers (people, mostly, with PhDs). At the same time I was writing regularly for the Philadelphia Gay News with instructions to write at a fourth grade reading level, and of course, the word “iconic” was part of that vocabulary. Well, we hear the word constantly these days. Unfortunately, that means it has lost a lot of its meaning as it has become colloquially “iconic.” It should mean “stands for a gate to spirituality.” Too often instead it just means “looks familiar.”

In KO what does the word mean? In KO it preserves aspects of its original connotation: something precious that is a gateway to better understanding, particularly with regard to visualization of culturally representative entities.

How do we at IKOS turn our own work into iconic work? We are rooted in empirical methods. Our work is eminently replicable. We report our references impeccably. For us, references are the evidence that what we describe is truly representative of a concept. Dahlberg implied and other since have written that the concept was the “atomic” element of knowledge organization (Dahlberg 2006; Smiraglia and Van den Heuvel 2013). This means that concepts paint pictures in people’s brains, those pictures are shared culturally, and from the very tiniest impression (what Peirce (1991, 181) might have called a “representamen”), the shared conception grows. There is “cultural synergy” (Smiraglia 2014)—the concept enters a knowledge organization system (KOS) that is itself a cultural disseminator and thus the concept becomes part of the cultural consciousness. This is then the iconic status of a concept.

At IKOS we are dedicated to sorting out the particularities of concepts, including the concept of “iconic.” We invite you to help us reclaim this critical term from public incoherence.

References

Dahlberg, Ingetraut. 2006. “Knowledge Organization: A New Science?” Knowledge Organization 33: 11-19.

Oxford English Dictionary Online, s.v. “Iconic,” accessed 12 October 2019. https://www-oed-com.ezproxy.lib.uwm.edu/view/Entry/90882?rskey=ZPEl2n&result=1&isAdvanced=false#eid

Peirce, Charles Sanders. 1991. Peirce on Signs: Writings on Semiotic, ed. by James Hoopes. Bloomington: Indiana Univ. Pr.

Smiraglia, Richard P. and Charles van den Heuvel. 2013. “Classifications and Concepts: Towards an Elementary Theory of Knowledge Interaction.” Journal of Documentation 69: 360-83.

WordNet. Search 3.1, s.v. “Iconic.”accessed 12 October 2019. https://wordnetweb.princeton.edu/

*Published in print as: Smiraglia, Richard P. 2019. “Iconic Knowledge, Iconic KO.” IKOS Bulletin 1, no.1 : 6-7.

We are scientists of knowledge and of its order, we have identified the atomic elements of our science (“concepts”) and we have empirically described their behavior, which eerily (or perhaps excitingly) mimics that of elements of quantum theory. That is, we have defined the domain of knowledge, identified its entities (concepts, works, etc.) and the forces that compel them (syntax, semantics, etc.). Ideation is the matter of knowledge and expression compels the conceptual particles that are made up of signs and can be grouped into taxons. Spacetime is represented by the notion of instantiation in which knowledge as concepts move from ideation to expression along a continuum. Spin is the representation of what we know as semiosis, the motion of signification. Strings are spatial objects analogous to instantiation networks or canons. I admit I have presented here a tiny bit of a partial explanation to make my point; for details see please van den Heuvel and Smiraglia 2010, 2013, 2021; Smiraglia and van den Heuvel 2013).

But what is the value of knowledge organization? What value is ascribed to the massive systems for the ordering of knowledge that are the applied products of our science? The question is not new. We can look to classificationists of the late 19^th and early 20^th centuries for notions of the “economies” of a KOS, usually expressed as the simple elegance with which a complex concept can be expressed (Smiraglia and Szostak 2018).

We can look to the appropriate social outcry at the demise of card catalogs (Baker 1994). What brilliant feats of engineering were the catalogs of major libraries built over a century by armies of catalogers, typists, card printers, card filers, filing revisers, etc., etc. What was the cost of that infrastructure?

(University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign library catalog S-Z along Wright Street dividing Champaign from Urbana.)

What is the value of a knowledge organization system (KOS)? Is it cost divided by benefit? How do we measure benefit? How do we know the true costs? What is the cost of the UDC? What is the cost of the DDC? What about systems like NANDA-I nursing vocabulary (2018) or the NAICS: North American Industrial Classification (https://www.census.gov/naics/ )

(Elichirigoity and Malone 2005) or the United Nations Standard Products and Services Code (UNSPC) classification (https://www.ungm.org/Public/UNSPSC ). What was the total cost of conversion of card catalogs to digital form? What is the cost of conversion of KOSs to linked data (see for example Szostak et al. 2020).

There is, of course, no direct answer to these questions.

A few years ago Greenberg (see for example 2015; 2017) began a series of musings about metadata capital, consulting with economists about the idea that capital was invested in the construction of metadata systems and therefore, metadata should be considered as an economic asset.

It seems that there must be an equation of sorts to the extent that the cost of a KOS can be determined such that the cost should be in ratio to the benefit of the system. IKOS exists for the purpose of identifying gaps in the structure of the science of KO. Each clinic must, from now on, pursue questions of value.

References

Baker, Nichols. 1994. “Discards.” The New Yorker :70, no. 764-86.

Elichirigoity, Fernando and Cheryl Knott Malone. 2005. “Measuring the New Economy: Industrial Classification and Open Source Software Production.” Knowledge Organization 32: 117-27.

Greenberg, Jane. 2015. “Metadata Capital: Raising Awareness, Exploring a New Concept.” Bulletin of the Association for Information Science and Technology 40, no. 4: 30-33.

GreenbergJane. 2017. “Big Metadata, Smart Metadata, and Metadata Capital: Toward Greater Synergy Between Data Science and Metadata” Journal of Data and Information Science 2, no.3: 19-36. https://doi.org/10.1515/jdis-2017-0012

NANDA International. 2018. Nursing Diagnoses: Definitions and Classification 2018-2020, ed. T. Heather Herdman and Shigemi Kamitsuru. 11^th ed. New York: Thieme.

Smiraglia, Richard P. and Rick Szostak. 2018. “Converting UDC to BCC: Comparative Approaches to Interdisciplinarity.” In Challenges and Opportunities for Knowledge Organization in the Digital Age: Proceedings of the Fifteenth International ISKO Conference, 9-11 July 2018, Porto, Portugal, ed. Fernanda Ribeira and Maria Elisa Cerveira. Advances in Knowledge Organization 16. Baden-Baden: Ergon, 530-38.

Szostak, Rick, Richard P. Smiraglia, Andrea Scharnhorst, Aida Slavic, Daniel MartÍnez-Ávila and Tobias Renwick. 2021. “Classifications as Linked Open Data: Challenges and Opportunities,”. In Linking Knowledge: Linked Open Data for Knowledge Organization and Visualization, ed. Richard P. Smiraglia and Andrea Scharnhorst. Baden-Baden: Ergon Verlag, 2021, 24-34

van den Heuvel, Charles and Richard P. Smiraglia. 2010. “Concepts as Particles: Metaphors for the Universe of Knowledge.” In Paradigms and Conceptual Systems in Knowledge Organization: Proceedings of the Eleventh International ISKO Conference, 23-26 February 2010 Rome Italy, ed. Claudio Gnoli and Fulvio Mazzocchi. Würzburg: Ergon-Verlag, 50-56.

van den Heuvel, Charles and Richard P. Smiraglia. 2013. “Visualizing Knowledge Interaction in the Multiverse of Knowledge.” In Classification and Visualization: Interfaces to Knowledge, Proceedings of the International UDC Seminar, 24-25 October 2013, The Hague, The Netherlands, ed. Aida Slavic, Almila Akdag Slah and Sylvie Davies. Würzburg: Ergon Verlag, 59‐72.

van den Heuvel, Charles and Richard P. Smiraglia. 2021. “Knowledge Spaces: Visualizing and Interacting with Dimensionality.” In Linking Knowledge: Linked Open Data for Knowledge Organization and Visualization, ed. Richard P. Smiraglia and Andrea Scharnhorst. Baden-Baden: Ergon Verlag, 200-18.

*Published in print as: Smiraglia, Richard P. 2022. “The Value of Knowledge Organization Systems.” IKOS Bulletin 4, no.1 : 23-26.

On 14 March, on the American television show 60 Minutes there was a story about COVID-19 mutants. Now, scientists understand mutations, so there was nothing surprising, scientifically, in the story. But the shock for me came when the scientist showed the journalist a large visualization of the data about mutations of the virus. Okay, maybe the journalist was just a bit lead-handed about the question; but the answer was completely unsatisfying for a scientist of information who has spent decades helping to visualize science.

The point of the chart, of course, was the visualization—the ability to “see” the mutations as they arise and spread.

Today the leading scientists of information with regard to visualization are Katy Börner of Indiana University (see her atlases of science [2010] and knowledge [2015]) and my colleague Andrea Scharnhorst (DANS [Data Archiving and Networked Services, Royal Netherlands Academy of the Arts and Sciences]) (see for example her team’s visualization of the whole of Wikipedia [Salah et al. 2011] http://scimaps.org/mapdetail/design_vs_emergence__127 ). Most recently we have been working to map the knowledge organization structures that exist hidden within the LOD Cloud (our book Linking Knowledge will appear later this year).

KO experts have used visualization as a key tool both for data analysis (e.g., co-word analysis or author co-citation analysis or network analysis) and for expressing abstract ideas (e.g., ontological maps or reference models such as the CIDOC cultural heritage Conceptual Reference Model http://www.cidoc-crm.org/ or its sibling the IFLA Library Reference Model https://www.ifla.org/publications/node/11412 ).

Like the 60 minutes example:

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/covid-variants-infectious-strains-60-minutes-2021-03-14/

whose map shows both the proximity of variants to the viruses from which they mutated and the distance among the distinct variants and the rate of mutation over time; showing all on the same map helps scientists visualize both the particulars and the full picture.

CBS News made it impossible to grab a real visual from their video so you will have to look for yourself—and warning, you cannot even pause the video to look at the visualization—but here is what I was able to capture:

We can see striations of different color, and along them we can see nodes that represent instantiations of the virus; the striations apparently represent mutations. We can see how the lines thicken and grow together over time as the virus and its mutations gain ground (and efficacy at transmission). This simple capture shows the importance of visualization. The knowledge of the degrees of mutation and of transmissibility is useful, but the visualization makes it all the more clear what sort of battle lies ahead for epidemiology, which is the science of controlling pandemics.

Research in knowledge organization is replete with visualizations. From my own work I can recommend three examples:

“Universes, Dimensions, Domains, Intensions and Extensions: Knowledge Organization for the 21st Century.” In A. Neelameghan and K.S. Raghavan eds. Categories, Contexts, and Relations in Knowledge Organization: Proceedings of the Twelfth International ISKO Conference, 6-9 August 2012, Mysore, India. Advances in Knowledge Organization 13. Würzburg: Ergon Verlag, 2012, 1-7. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/287850076_Universes_dimensions_domains_intensions_and_extensions_Knowledge_organization_for_the_21st_century

“Prologomena to a New Order: A Domain-Analytical Review of the Influence of S.R. Ranganathan on Knowledge Organization.” In Sarada Ranganathan Endowment for Library Science, Bangalore Golden Jubliee. SRELS Journal of Information Management (2013): 709-19. http://www.i-scholar.in/index.php/sjim/article/view/43812

Smiraglia, Richard P. 2018. “The Evolution of the Concept: A Case Study from American Documentation.” Canadian Journal of Information and Library Science 42: 113-34. https://muse.jhu.edu/article/717390/pdf

Currently in IKOS (The Institute for Knowledge Organization and Structure, Inc. https://knoworg.org ) we are working on a study of home care nursing in the pandemic. To guide our research we continually analyze our data even as the data store grows, mirroring the work of the medical researchers in the 60 Minutes report above. For example, after a simple analysis of video transcripts of home care nurses being interviewed in the press we were able to return a visualization of frequently occurring themes.

This visualization helps us guide our further research by showing clear facets in the nurses’ experiences. We see especially the important core of PPE and the frequent mention of the “front lines” in the “home_care” facet. This gives us important clues to the emotional component of the profession of home care nursing at the moment. Stay tuned for publications from our work in the near future.

It is important that scientists of visualization in the KO community speak up and make their work known, preferably in popular venues, such as the Economist, so that the world will understand the role we play in solving the great riddles of science. KO is vital to science.

References

Börner, Katy. 2010. Atlas of Science: Visualizing What We Know. Cambridge, Mass.: The MIT Press.

Börner, Katy. 2015. Atlas of Knowledge: Anyone Can Map. Cambridge, Mass.: The MIT Press.

Salah, Alkim Almila Akdag, Cheng Gao, Andrea Scharnhorst, and Krzysztof Suchecki. 2011. Design vs. Emergence: Visualisation of Knowledge Orders. Courtesy of The Knowledge Space Lab, Royal Netherlands Academy of Arts and Sciences. Places & Spaces: Mapping Science VII.5 http://scimaps.org/mapdetail/design_vs_emergence__127

Smiraglia, Richard P. 2012. “Universes, Dimensions, Domains, Intensions and Extensions: Knowledge Organization for the 21st Century.” In Categories, Contexts, and Relations in Knowledge Organization: Proceedings of the Twelfth International ISKO Conference, 6-9 August 2012, Mysore, India, ed. A. Neelameghan and K.S. Raghavan. Advances in Knowledge Organization 13. Würzburg: Ergon Verlag, 1-7. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/287850076_Universes_dimensions_domains_intensions_and_extensions_Knowledge_organization_for_the_21st_century

Smiraglia, Richard P. 2013. “Prologomena to a New Order: A Domain-Analytical Review of the Influence of S.R. Ranganathan on Knowledge Organization.” In Sarada Ranganathan Endowment for Library Science, Bangalore Golden Jubliee. SRELS Journal of Information Management (2013): 709-19. http://www.i-scholar.in/index.php/sjim/article/view/43812

Smiraglia, Richard P. 2018. “The Evolution of the Concept: A Case Study from American Documentation.” Canadian Journal of Information and Library Science 42: 113-34. https://muse.jhu.edu/article/717390/pdf

Smiraglia, Richard P. and Andrea Scharnhorst, eds. 2021. Linking Knowledge: Linked Open Data for Knowledge Organization. Baden-Baden: Ergon Verlag. Forthcoming.

Introduction

Readymade godard brooklyn, kogi shoreditch hashtag hella shaman kitsch man bun pinterest flexitarian. Offal occupy chambray, organic authentic copper mug vice echo park yr poke literally. Ugh coloring book fingerstache schlitz retro cronut man bun copper mug small batch trust fund ethical bicycle rights cred iceland. Celiac schlitz la croix 3 wolf moon butcher. Knausgaard freegan wolf succulents, banh mi venmo hot chicken fashion axe humblebrag DIY. 

Waistcoat gluten-free cronut cred quinoa. Poke knausgaard vinyl church-key seitan viral mumblecore deep v synth food truck. Ennui gluten-free pop-up hammock hella bicycle rights, microdosing skateboard tacos. Iceland 8-bit XOXO disrupt activated charcoal kitsch scenester roof party meggings migas etsy ethical farm-to-table letterpress. Banjo wayfarers chartreuse taiyaki, stumptown prism 8-bit tote bag.

Story

Listicle offal viral, flannel franzen roof party shoreditch meditation subway tile bicycle rights tbh fingerstache copper mug organic umami. Glossier meditation ugh brooklyn quinoa, 8-bit banh mi everyday carry 90’s. Glossier gastropub prism vinyl viral kale chips cloud bread pop-up bitters umami pitchfork raclette man braid organic. Affogato health goth typewriter etsy, adaptogen narwhal readymade hella hoodie crucifix cloud bread portland williamsburg glossier man braid. Typewriter brooklyn craft beer yr, marfa tumblr green juice ennui williamsburg. Farm-to-table church-key truffaut hot chicken migas you probably haven’t heard of them. Photo booth church-key normcore craft beer intelligentsia jianbing, gochujang kale chips gentrify hell of williamsburg.

Conclusion

Venmo fixie knausgaard readymade. 3 wolf moon blue bottle sartorial blog. Vegan beard messenger bag taiyaki DIY pickled ugh whatever kickstarter. Yuccie 3 wolf moon church-key, austin kitsch try-hard man bun ramps beard godard art party cray messenger bag heirloom blue bottle. Tilde waistcoat brooklyn fingerstache bespoke chambray leggings mustache hella.

Introduction

Readymade godard brooklyn, kogi shoreditch hashtag hella shaman kitsch man bun pinterest flexitarian. Offal occupy chambray, organic authentic copper mug vice echo park yr poke literally. Ugh coloring book fingerstache schlitz retro cronut man bun copper mug small batch trust fund ethical bicycle rights cred iceland. Celiac schlitz la croix 3 wolf moon butcher. Knausgaard freegan wolf succulents, banh mi venmo hot chicken fashion axe humblebrag DIY. 

Waistcoat gluten-free cronut cred quinoa. Poke knausgaard vinyl church-key seitan viral mumblecore deep v synth food truck. Ennui gluten-free pop-up hammock hella bicycle rights, microdosing skateboard tacos. Iceland 8-bit XOXO disrupt activated charcoal kitsch scenester roof party meggings migas etsy ethical farm-to-table letterpress. Banjo wayfarers chartreuse taiyaki, stumptown prism 8-bit tote bag.

Story

Listicle offal viral, flannel franzen roof party shoreditch meditation subway tile bicycle rights tbh fingerstache copper mug organic umami. Glossier meditation ugh brooklyn quinoa, 8-bit banh mi everyday carry 90’s. Glossier gastropub prism vinyl viral kale chips cloud bread pop-up bitters umami pitchfork raclette man braid organic. Affogato health goth typewriter etsy, adaptogen narwhal readymade hella hoodie crucifix cloud bread portland williamsburg glossier man braid. Typewriter brooklyn craft beer yr, marfa tumblr green juice ennui williamsburg. Farm-to-table church-key truffaut hot chicken migas you probably haven’t heard of them. Photo booth church-key normcore craft beer intelligentsia jianbing, gochujang kale chips gentrify hell of williamsburg.

Conclusion

Venmo fixie knausgaard readymade. 3 wolf moon blue bottle sartorial blog. Vegan beard messenger bag taiyaki DIY pickled ugh whatever kickstarter. Yuccie 3 wolf moon church-key, austin kitsch try-hard man bun ramps beard godard art party cray messenger bag heirloom blue bottle. Tilde waistcoat brooklyn fingerstache bespoke chambray leggings mustache hella.

Introduction

Readymade godard brooklyn, kogi shoreditch hashtag hella shaman kitsch man bun pinterest flexitarian. Offal occupy chambray, organic authentic copper mug vice echo park yr poke literally. Ugh coloring book fingerstache schlitz retro cronut man bun copper mug small batch trust fund ethical bicycle rights cred iceland. Celiac schlitz la croix 3 wolf moon butcher. Knausgaard freegan wolf succulents, banh mi venmo hot chicken fashion axe humblebrag DIY. 

Waistcoat gluten-free cronut cred quinoa. Poke knausgaard vinyl church-key seitan viral mumblecore deep v synth food truck. Ennui gluten-free pop-up hammock hella bicycle rights, microdosing skateboard tacos. Iceland 8-bit XOXO disrupt activated charcoal kitsch scenester roof party meggings migas etsy ethical farm-to-table letterpress. Banjo wayfarers chartreuse taiyaki, stumptown prism 8-bit tote bag.

Story

Listicle offal viral, flannel franzen roof party shoreditch meditation subway tile bicycle rights tbh fingerstache copper mug organic umami. Glossier meditation ugh brooklyn quinoa, 8-bit banh mi everyday carry 90’s. Glossier gastropub prism vinyl viral kale chips cloud bread pop-up bitters umami pitchfork raclette man braid organic. Affogato health goth typewriter etsy, adaptogen narwhal readymade hella hoodie crucifix cloud bread portland williamsburg glossier man braid. Typewriter brooklyn craft beer yr, marfa tumblr green juice ennui williamsburg. Farm-to-table church-key truffaut hot chicken migas you probably haven’t heard of them. Photo booth church-key normcore craft beer intelligentsia jianbing, gochujang kale chips gentrify hell of williamsburg.

Conclusion

Venmo fixie knausgaard readymade. 3 wolf moon blue bottle sartorial blog. Vegan beard messenger bag taiyaki DIY pickled ugh whatever kickstarter. Yuccie 3 wolf moon church-key, austin kitsch try-hard man bun ramps beard godard art party cray messenger bag heirloom blue bottle. Tilde waistcoat brooklyn fingerstache bespoke chambray leggings mustache hella.

Introduction

Readymade godard brooklyn, kogi shoreditch hashtag hella shaman kitsch man bun pinterest flexitarian. Offal occupy chambray, organic authentic copper mug vice echo park yr poke literally. Ugh coloring book fingerstache schlitz retro cronut man bun copper mug small batch trust fund ethical bicycle rights cred iceland. Celiac schlitz la croix 3 wolf moon butcher. Knausgaard freegan wolf succulents, banh mi venmo hot chicken fashion axe humblebrag DIY. 

Waistcoat gluten-free cronut cred quinoa. Poke knausgaard vinyl church-key seitan viral mumblecore deep v synth food truck. Ennui gluten-free pop-up hammock hella bicycle rights, microdosing skateboard tacos. Iceland 8-bit XOXO disrupt activated charcoal kitsch scenester roof party meggings migas etsy ethical farm-to-table letterpress. Banjo wayfarers chartreuse taiyaki, stumptown prism 8-bit tote bag.

Story

Listicle offal viral, flannel franzen roof party shoreditch meditation subway tile bicycle rights tbh fingerstache copper mug organic umami. Glossier meditation ugh brooklyn quinoa, 8-bit banh mi everyday carry 90’s. Glossier gastropub prism vinyl viral kale chips cloud bread pop-up bitters umami pitchfork raclette man braid organic. Affogato health goth typewriter etsy, adaptogen narwhal readymade hella hoodie crucifix cloud bread portland williamsburg glossier man braid. Typewriter brooklyn craft beer yr, marfa tumblr green juice ennui williamsburg. Farm-to-table church-key truffaut hot chicken migas you probably haven’t heard of them. Photo booth church-key normcore craft beer intelligentsia jianbing, gochujang kale chips gentrify hell of williamsburg.

Conclusion

Venmo fixie knausgaard readymade. 3 wolf moon blue bottle sartorial blog. Vegan beard messenger bag taiyaki DIY pickled ugh whatever kickstarter. Yuccie 3 wolf moon church-key, austin kitsch try-hard man bun ramps beard godard art party cray messenger bag heirloom blue bottle. Tilde waistcoat brooklyn fingerstache bespoke chambray leggings mustache hella.