@article{smith04semantic,
	title = {Building Semantic Tools for Concept-based Learning Spaces},
	author = {Terence R. Smith and Marcia L. Zeng and Adept P. Team},
	journal = {Journal of digital information},
	number = {4},
	url = {http://jodi.tamu.edu/Articles/v04/i04/Smith/},
	volume = {4},
	year = {2004},
	biburl = {http://www.bibsonomy.org/bibtex/24d0148c5220928e161c1ef805c908788/msn},
	abstract = {Applying conventional principles of knowledge organization, representation, and other semantic tools, we have constructed a model for scientific concepts and employed knowledge bases and visualization tools to represent knowledge concerning scientific concepts. Strongly-structured models, such as the integration of a taxonomy (or thesaurus) with metadata (or attribute-value pairs) and domain-specific markup languages, as well as specialized models for learning scientific concepts, focus on such attributes as objective representations, operational semantics, use, and interrelationships of concepts. All of these play important roles in constructing representations of knowledge in most domains of science. Instructional activities for undergraduate teaching and learning are greatly facilitated with the use of such integrated semantic tools.},
	priority = {2}, citeulike-article-id = {593597},
	keywords = {mrefs research.conceptual research.eLearning research.sw }
}

@article{journals/ibmrd/team08,
	title = {Overview of the IBM Blue Gene/P Project.},
	author = {IBM Blue Gene team},
	journal = {IBM Journal of Research and Development},
	number = {1-2},
	pages = {199-220},
	url = {http://dblp.uni-trier.de/db/journals/ibmrd/ibmrd52.html#team08},
	volume = {52},
	year = {2008},
	biburl = {http://www.bibsonomy.org/bibtex/2aca68ee2c1f9c566ac3da50ef477949d/dblp},
	description = {dblp},
	ee = {http://dx.doi.org/10.1147/rd.521.0199}, date = {2008-08-20},
	keywords = {dblp }
}

@manual{RManual,
	title = {R: A Language and Environment for Statistical Computing},
	address = {Vienna, Austria},
	author = { {R Development Core Team}},
	note = {{ISBN} 3-900051-07-0},
	organization = {R Foundation for Statistical Computing},
	url = {http://www.R-project.org},
	year = {2007},
	biburl = {http://www.bibsonomy.org/bibtex/2a5ab69a430c22b2808402d08e5fba853/cabird},
	description = {my huge bibtex},
	date-added = {2008-01-20 20:38:27 -0800}, date-modified = {2008-01-20 20:38:28 -0800}, bdsk-url-1 = {http://www.R-project.org},
	keywords = {imported }
}

@article{RefWorks:778,
	title = {Optimal search strategies for retrieving systematic reviews from Medline: analytical survey},
	author = {V. M. Montori and N. L. Wilczynski and D. Morgan and R. B. Haynes and Hedges Team},
	journal = {BMJ (Clinical research ed.)},
	month = {Jan 8},
	note = {LR: 20061115; PUBM: Print-Electronic; GR: 1 R01 LM06866/LM/NLM; DEP: 20041224; JID: 8900488; CIN: BMJ. 2005 May 21;330(7501):1162-3. PMID: 15905232; 2004/12/24 [aheadofprint]; ppublish},
	number = {7482},
	pages = {68},
	volume = {330},
	year = {2005},
	biburl = {http://www.bibsonomy.org/bibtex/210310803e0584c822b408509fd1b5a45/mager},
	description = {Leitlinienwartung},
	abstract = {OBJECTIVE: To develop optimal search strategies in Medline for retrieving systematic reviews. DESIGN: Analytical survey. DATA SOURCES: 161 journals published in 2000 indexed in Medline. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The sensitivity, specificity, and precision of retrieval of systematic reviews of 4862 unique terms in 782,485 combinations of one to five terms were determined by comparison with a hand search of all articles (the criterion standard) in 161 journals published during 2000 (49,028 articles). RESULTS: Only 753 (1.5%) of the 49,028 articles were systematic reviews. The most sensitive strategy included five terms and had a sensitivity of 99.9% (95% confidence interval 99.6% to 100%) and a specificity of 52% (51.6% to 52.5%). The strategy that best minimised the difference between sensitivity and specificity had a sensitivity of 98% (97% to 99%) and specificity of 90.8% (90.5% to 91.1%). Highest precision for multiterm strategies, 57% (54% to 60%), was achieved at a sensitivity of 71% (68% to 74%). The term "cochrane database of systematic reviews.jn." was the most precise single term search strategy (sensitivity of 56% (52% to 60%) and precision of 96% (94% to 98%)). These strategies are available through the "limit" screen of Ovid's search interface for Medline. CONCLUSIONS: Systematic reviews can be retrieved from Medline with close to perfect sensitivity or specificity, or with high precision, by using empirical search strategies.},
	isbn = {1468-5833}, language = {eng},
	keywords = {Headings; Information Literature; MEDLINE/standards; Medical Retrieval/methods/standards; Review Sensitivity Specificity Storage Subject and }
}

@article{RefWorks:707,
	title = {Optimal search strategies for retrieving scientifically strong studies of treatment from Medline: analytical survey},
	author = {R. B. Haynes and K. A. McKibbon and N. L. Wilczynski and S. D. Walter and S. R. Werre and Hedges Team},
	journal = {BMJ (Clinical research ed.)},
	month = {May 21},
	note = {LR: 20061115; PUBM: Print-Electronic; GR: R01 LM06866-01/LM/NLM; DEP: 20050513; JID: 8900488; CIN: BMJ. 2005 May 21;330(7501):1162-3. PMID: 15905232; 2005/05/13 [aheadofprint]; ppublish},
	number = {7501},
	pages = {1179},
	url = {http://bmj.com/cgi/content/full/330/7501/1179},
	volume = {330},
	year = {2005},
	biburl = {http://www.bibsonomy.org/bibtex/294f44c3e8b04f2de432bb12090d95444/mager},
	description = {Leitlinienwartung},
	abstract = {OBJECTIVE: To develop and test optimal Medline search strategies for retrieving sound clinical studies on prevention or treatment of health disorders. DESIGN: Analytical survey. DATA SOURCES: 161 clinical journals indexed in Medline for the year 2000. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Sensitivity, specificity, precision, and accuracy of 4862 unique terms in 18 404 combinations. RESULTS: Only 1587 (24.2%) of 6568 articles on treatment met criteria for testing clinical interventions. Combinations of search terms reached peak sensitivities of 99.3% (95% confidence interval 98.7% to 99.8%) at a specificity of 70.4% (69.8% to 70.9%). Compared with best single terms, best multiple terms increased sensitivity for sound studies by 4.1% (absolute increase), but with substantial loss of specificity (absolute difference 23.7%) when sensitivity was maximised. When terms were combined to maximise specificity, 97.4% (97.3% to 97.6%) was achieved, about the same as that achieved by the best single term (97.6%, 97.4% to 97.7%). The strategies newly reported in this paper outperformed other validated search strategies except for two strategies that had slightly higher specificity (98.1% and 97.6% v 97.4%) but lower sensitivity (42.0% and 92.8% v 93.1%). CONCLUSION: New empirical search strategies have been validated to optimise retrieval from Medline of articles reporting high quality clinical studies on prevention or treatment of health disorders.},
	isbn = {1468-5833}, language = {eng},
	keywords = {Headings; Information MEDLINE; Medical Retrieval/standards; Sensitivity Specificity Storage Subject and }
}

@manual{mpfr,
	title = {The Multiple Precision Floating-Point Reliable Library Manual},
	author = { {The MPFR team}},
	year = {2008},
	biburl = {http://www.bibsonomy.org/bibtex/24f964172b8499ff4724cd33c85b0c2fe/cchow},
	keywords = {mixed_precision }
}

@book{SPIRE1998,
	title = {The SPIRE Handbook - Better, Faster, Cheaper - Software Development
	in Small Organisations},
	author = {SPIRE Project Team},
	publisher = {Centre of Software Engineering, Ireland},
	year = {1998},
	biburl = {http://www.bibsonomy.org/bibtex/22335f272bf66bd627ab95bb61d4b84b1/pdeleenh},
	timestamp = {2008.05.15}, isbn = {1-874303-02-9}, owner = {pdeleenh},
	keywords = {imported }
}

@techreport{MOD_2005,
	title = {Common Terminological Framework for Interoperable Electronic Identity Management},
	editor = { {Modinis IDM Study Team}},
	institution = {Europäische Gemeinschaft - eGovernment Unit},
	month = {November},
	number = {2.01},
	url = {https://www.cosic.esat.kuleuven.be/modinis-idm/twiki/pub/Main/GlossaryDoc/modinis.terminology.paper.v2.01.2005-11-23.pdf},
	year = {2005},
	biburl = {http://www.bibsonomy.org/bibtex/2c69b4fb7983eb650cead620b45aac771/dawinci},
	keywords = {digital_identity egovernment identity_management }
}

@article{123,
	title = {Apple Professional Services Terms and Conditions},
	author = {Apple Support Team},
	editor = { Apple},
	pages = {2},
	url = {http://images.apple.com/legal/terms/docs/APS_Terms20070927.pdf},
	year = {2007},
	biburl = {http://www.bibsonomy.org/bibtex/281502854b85d596e682c374735b21d83/akaneikeda},
	description = {Report of Customer Service of Apple},
	keywords = {Apple Service lv_crossmedia lv_crossmedia_3 }
}

@article{team1992,
	title = {A model of the French financial system at the Bank of France : MEFISTO version 1 (modelling the evolution of financial stocks)},
	author = {The MEFISTO team},
	journal = {Economic Modelling},
	month = {Jul},
	number = {3},
	pages = {211--252},
	url = {http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/B6VB1-46BHT2S-17/1/9f681b62b505f8b3b1f7bb6b810636e4},
	volume = {9},
	year = {1992},
	biburl = {http://www.bibsonomy.org/bibtex/2119bdddc52c6438041b95639427c84a6/smicha},
	keywords = {France }
}