025.431: The Dewey blog

Signs of Spring

The slideshow of signs of spring put together by NBC News makes clear that spring means different things in different places, from crocuses peeking out above the snow in Berlin, Germany (see slide 15) to beach-going  in Florida (USA; see slide 6).  In Washington, D.C., spring means cherry blossoms (slide 1, but see also slide 12). 

Last year the Library of Congress presented an exhibit on the 100^th anniversary of the city of Tokyo’s gift of 3,000 cherry trees to the city of Washington D.C.  Two of those trees are on the grounds of the Library of Congress, including this one, as seen in a shot taken last Friday:

(Or in case you want to see a full tree in bloom, catch the Library of Congress blog posting here.)

From a botanical perspective, cherry trees are classed in 583.73 Rosales, where cherries are present in the including note.  This number can be used to build several numbers in the 630s, of which the most appropriate for our purposes is 635.977373 (built from 635.977 Ornamental trees, plus notation 373 from 583.73, following the add instructions at 635.9773-635.9775).  The Relative Index terms Cherries—ornamental arboriculture and Japanese flowering cherry both lead to 635.977373.

Prairie Dogs

An article in a recent issue of Science ("At Home on the Range: Prairie Rodents Yield Their Secrets to a Dogged Observer") begins:

To say that John Hoogland is passionate about prairie dogs is an understatement. A behavioral ecologist, he has studied these North American colonial rodents for 40 years, spending months at a time sitting in a blind from dawn to dusk recording the activities of each individual in a colony.

The comprehensive biology number and interdisciplinary number for prairie dogs is 599.367 Cynomys (Prairie dogs).  An example of a general work classed in 599.367 is Prairie Dogs.

The record for 599.367 Cynomys (Prairie dogs) has a footnote: "Add as instructed under 592-599."  The add table at 592-599 Specific taxonomic groups of animals makes it possible to add 1 General topics of natural history of animals and then add further as instructed:  "Add to 1 the numbers following 591 in 591.3-591.7, e.g., beneficial animals 163, marine animals 177." Thus it is possible to add notation from subdivisions of 591 Specific topics in natural history of animals to the number for prairie dogs.

Hoogland was called a "behavioral ecologist."  Browsing the Relative Index for "ecology" yields:

Ecology--animals 591.7

Browsing the Relative Index for "behavior" yields:

Behavior--animals 591.5

At 591 Specific topics in natural history of animals is a table of preference in which

Behavior 591.5

appears above

Animal ecology, animals characteristic of specific environments 591.7

Hence we might expect works by a behavioral ecologist to be classed with behavior rather than ecology.  That seems to fit the specific report from Hoogland given in another article in the same issue of Science: "Prairie Dogs Disperse When All Close Kin Have Disappeared."  Here is part of the editor's summary:

Dispersal, movement away from an organism's natal site, is a critical stage in the development of a juvenile into an adult and several drivers of this process have been proposed. . . . Hoogland (p. 1205) studied populations of three species of prairie dogs over more than three decades and found that the presence of close kin in these highly social rodents actually led young animals to remain on their natal site, whereas dispersal away from it occurred almost exclusively when close female kin were absent. This suggests that sociality may in fact result in individuals remaining with their close kin in order to benefit from cooperation and that longer-distance dispersal may instead occur when the opportunity for cooperation does not exist.

Let's consider a monographic work (by C. N. Slobodchikoff and others):  Prairie Dogs: Communication and Community in an Animal Society. The work has the LCSH:

Prairie dogs
Animal communication
Social behavior in animals

The work is classed in 599.367156 Behavior relating to life cycle in prairie dogs (built with 599.367 Cynomys [Prairie dogs] plus 1 General topics of natural history of animals plus 56 from 591.56 Behavior relating to life cycle).  At 591.56 is a class-here note: "Class here . . .  social behavior . . . ."  Also at 591.56 is a see reference: "For communication, see 591.59."  Since this work treats more aspects of social behavior than just communication, notation from the implied comprehensive number 591.56 is used to build the DDC number for the work instead of notation from 591.59 Communication.  Here is how the number building process looks with the WebDewey number building tool:

The Rule of Three

Section 5.7 (D) of the DDC Introduction presents the rule of three:  "Class a work on three or more subjects that are all subdivisions of a broader subject in the first higher number that includes them all (unless one subject is treated more fully than the others)."

Let's take Dunham’s History of Denmark, Sweden, and Norway as an example.  Denmark is classed in 948.9 Denmark and Finland, Sweden is classed in 948.5 Sweden, and Norway is classed in 948.1 Norway.  By the rule of three, this work is classed in the first higher number that includes them all, i.e., 948 Scandinavia and Finland. 

Given that Scandinavia consists of Norway, Sweden, and Denmark, the rule of three simply confirms what most classifiers probably would have done intuitively.  The rule becomes more useful when the subject of the work consists of the equal treatment of three or more topics of a rather larger set of subtopics.  For example, consider a work on what at one time were called the "outer planets," Uranus, Neptune & Pluto.  Individually the three topics would be classed in 523.47 Uranus, 523.48  Neptune, and 523.4922  Pluto.  The first higher number that includes them all is 523.4 Planets, asteroids, trans-Neptunian objects of solar system.

Does the rule of three concern only notational hierarchy, or does it also concern structural hierarchy?   On the one hand, the way the rule of three is stated—especially with its mention of "the first higher number that includes [all of the subdivisions]"—suggests that it concerns notational hierarchy only.  On the other hand, if the rule of three were to interact with the comprehensive number for a topic, interpreting it as applying to structural hierarchy would generally lead to appropriate classification results.  (Alternatively, we could say that notes that give the comprehensive number for a subject override the rule of three.  In any case, we get the same results.)

To explore this topic further, let’s consider the following segment of the classification scheme:

224.6     *Hosea (Osee)

224.7     *Joel

224.8     *Amos

224.9     *Minor Prophets

For Hosea, see 224.6; for Joel, see 224.7; for Amos, see 224.8

224.91           *Obadiah (Abdias)

224.92           *Jonah (Jonas)

224.93           *Micah (Micheas)

. . .

The Minor Prophets are twelve in number; nine are listed in the direct subdivisions of 224.9 Minor Prophets, while the other three are given in coordinate notation at 224.6–224.8, but subordinated to 224.9 through a series of see references.  The rule of three calls for a work on Obadiah, Jonah, and Micah to be classed in 224.9 as the first higher subdivision that includes them all.  If a work on three of the twelve Minor Prophets in direct subdivisions of 224.9 should be classed there, it would also make sense for a work on Hosea, Joel, Amos, Obadiah, Jonah, and Micah—that is, a work on six of the twelve Minor Prophets, three of which are in direct subdivisions of 224.9 and three of which are subordinated to 224.9 through see references—to be classed in 224.9 also, as the comprehensive number for Minor Prophets.  By the same token, we also see a work on Hosea, Joel, and Amos being classed in 224.9, as the comprehensive number for Minor Prophets, even though these three Minor Prophets are "only" in the structural hierarchy under 224.9 and not in its notational hierarchy.   (By the way, such works are highly likely to be commentaries, to be classed in 224.907 Commentaries on Minor Prophets, but the building of that number gets into issues that would sidetrack us.) 

A work on the history of Denmark, Sweden, and Norway should be discoverable by a search on the history of any of the three countries; a work on Uranus, Neptune, and Pluto should be discoverable by a search for any of the three astronomical bodies; and a work on Hosea, Joel, and Amos should be discoverable by a search on any of the three Biblical books.  Statements here about the number that the rule of three instructs us to use should be understood to address the assignment of the standard DDC number, captured in the 082 field (Dewey Decimal Classification Number) of the MARC bibliographic record.  The numbers not chosen as the standard number should be considered for inclusion in the 083 field (Additional Dewey Decimal Classification Number). 

The Rule of Application

Section 5.7 of the DDC Introduction addresses how to classify a work that includes more than one subject in the same discipline:

5.7   A work may include multiple subjects treated separately or in relation to one another from the viewpoint of a single discipline. Use the following guidelines in determining the best placement for the work:

(A)    Class a work dealing with interrelated subjects with the subject that is being acted upon. This is called the rule of application, and takes precedence over any other rule. For instance, class an analytical work dealing with Shakespeare's influence on Keats with Keats. Similarly, class a work on the influence of the Great Depression on 20th century American art with American art.

Here is introduced the rule of application, a rule that guides the classifier in classifying a work on interrelated subjects in which one subject can be said to act upon the other.  The rule states that such a work should be classed with the subject acted upon.  (The characterization of the rule of application in the Glossary—"The rule instructing that works about the application of one subject to a second subject or the influence of one subject on another subject are classified with the second subject"—indicates that the single discipline context in which the rule of application is presented in the Introduction is not defining/restrictive.)  The Introduction also makes clear that, if multiple rules apply to the classification of a work and one of those rules is the rule of application, it "trumps" (takes precedence over) all other rules.  (In fact, the pre-eminence of the rule of application is the motivation for starting our review of the rules here.)

The rule of application is also mentioned in section 8.12 of the Introduction, where we learn that the table of preference at the beginning of Table 1 is overruled by ("yields to") the rule of application. For example, "by the rule of application, teaching financial management in hospital administration is classed in 362.110681, not 362.11071, even though notation 07 is above notation 068 in the table of preference."  We have three subjects here:  hospitals, financial management, and teaching.  Teaching is applied to financial management, while financial management is applied to hospitals, financial management constituting one aspect of hospital administration.  Since hospitals are the core subject acted upon, we start with 362.11 Hospitals and related institutions.  We then add standard subdivision T1—0681 Organization and financial management because this is the subject element that acts upon hospitals.

Perhaps the most common applications of the rule of application concern the philosophy of a subject or the history of a subject.  Such works are classed in the subject, with standard subdivisions T1—01 Philosophy and theory or T1—09 History, geographic treatment, biography added to express philosophy or history, respectively.  Thus we have 109 for the history of philosophy and 901 for the philosophy of history.  (Imagine if the rule of application were reversed and the philosophy of all subjects was to be classed in the 100s and the history of all subjects in the 900s!) 

Given the rule of application:

• Works on Shakespeare's influence on Keats are classed in the number for Keats (821.7 English poetry—1800–1837) rather than in the number for Shakespeare (822.33 William Shakespeare under 822.3 Drama of Elizabethan period, 1558–1625).
• Works on the use of data mining to support business decisions are classed within business, in a subdivision of 658.4038 Information management ("Class here gathering of information by management or use in managerial decision making; information resources, knowledge management") rather than in 006.312 Data mining, its interdisciplinary home within computer science.  The specific number for data mining to support business decisions is 658.403802856312, built with the base number 658.4038, plus T1—0285 Computer applications, plus the numbers following 00 in 006.312, following the add instruction at T1—0285.
• Works on the chemistry of hydrocarbon combustion are classed in the number for hydrocarbons (547.01 Hydrocarbons) rather than in the number for combustion (541.361 Combustion).  Numbers for specific kinds of compounds identified by component elements allow for addition from the internal add table under 547, where we find 0453–0458 Specific topics of physical chemistry and the add instruction to add to 045 the numbers following 541.3 in 541.33–541.38.  The specific number for the chemistry of hydrocarbon combustion therefore is 547.0104561.
• Works on the fractography of glass are classed in the materials science number for glass (620.144 Glass) rather than in the number for fractography (620.1126 Resistance to fracture (Fracture mechanics)).  Numbers for specific kinds of materials allow for addition from the internal add table under 620.16–620.19, where we find 1–9 Specific properties and nondestructive testing and the add instruction to add the numbers following 620.112 in 620.1121–620.1129.  The specific number for fractography of glass therefore is 620.1446.
• Works on obedience training for retrievers are classed in the number for retrievers (636.7527 Retrievers) rather than in the number for obedience training (636.0887 Pets ["Class here obedience training").  Numbers for specific breeds of dogs allow for addition of notation from the internal add table under 636.1–636.8, where we find 35 Training.  The specific number for obedience training for retrievers therefore is 636.752735.  (The decision to class obedience training for retrievers with retrievers rather than with obedience training is reinforced by the rule of zero, which we will look at later.)

It is not by accident or mere coincidence in the final three examples that provision has been made for building numbers that express the complex subject we were interested in representing.  These reflect a pattern common throughout the DDC in which the rule of application has, in effect, been built into the DDC.  A follow-up post will give further examples of where the rule of application is woven into the schedules.

Olympic Etymology

By no later than 776 B.C., a series of athletic competitions had commenced among representatives of Greek city-states, the precursor to the modern Olympic games that we have been enjoying these past two weeks.  The games took place in Olympia, Greece (classed in T2—388 Arcadia to 323, Argolis to 323, Elis to 323, where Olympia is found in the including note).  Or, if you don't care for that presumed genesis of the games' name, you may be interested in the mythological explanation given by the ancient Greeks of the games’ origin, which involved some of the gods who lived permanently on Mount Olympus (the "Olympian gods") engaging in various athletic competitions.  If the dot on online maps is placed accurately, then Mount Olympus is just inside the borders of Thessaly and would be classed in T2—382 Thessaly to 23, Epirus to 323, adjacent Ionian Islands to 323.  (Please don't ask me to make sense of why Olympia is in the west of Greece, but Mount Olympus is in the east.) The Olympian gods (and goddesses) themselves are classed in 292.211 Greek and Roman gods and goddesses, which is built from 292 Classical religion (Greek and Roman religion), plus 211 from 202.11 God, gods, goddesses, divinities and deities, following the instructions at 292.1–292.9 Specific elements; notice the class-elsewhere note at 292.07–292.08 Classical religion by specific culture (see 292.08 Greek religion), which reads, "Class specific elements regardless of culture in 292.1–292.9."  (Because he didn't think the unexplained east/west difference of Olympia and Mount Olympus was confusing enough, Michael Panzer adds that the site of the ancient games was just north of Mt. Kronos, which is named after Kronos, the leader of the mythological Titans; the Titans were overthrown by the Olympians, led by Kronos' son Zeus, in honor of whom the ancient Olympic games were held.) 

Olympia, Greece continues to play a unique role in the modern Olympic games, since it is from here that the Olympic torch is lit and begins its journey toward the place where the games will be played.

As Michael recently alluded to, the term "Olympiad" also derives from the games, where an Olympiad is a 4-year period.  In ancient Greece, an Olympiad ran from one summer execution of the games to the next execution four years later.  Since our modern games include both summer games (classed in 796.48 Olympic games) and winter games (classed in 796.98 Winter Olympic games), one of which takes place every two years, an Olympiad now runs from January 1 of the year in which the summer games are played, for four years.   As a chronological unit, Olympiads are classed in 529.2 Intervals of time.

Higgs Boson?

CERN, the European Organization for Nuclear Research, reported July 4:

The ATLAS and CMS experiments at CERN today presented their latest results in the search for the long-sought Higgs boson. Both experiments see strong indications for the presence of a new particle, which could be the Higgs boson, in the mass region around 126 gigaelectronvolts (GeV).

The experiments found hints of the new particle by analysing trillions of proton-proton collisions from the Large Hadron Collider (LHC) in 2011 and 2012. The Standard Model of particle physics predicts that a Higgs boson would decay into different particles – which the LHC experiments then detect.

Reuters reported:

Scientists at Europe's CERN research center have found a new subatomic particle, a basic building block of the universe, which appears to be the boson imagined and named half a century ago by theoretical physicist Peter Higgs.

"We have reached a milestone in our understanding of nature," CERN director general Rolf Heuer told a gathering of scientists and the world's media near Geneva on Wednesday.

"The discovery of a particle consistent with the Higgs boson opens the way to more detailed studies, requiring larger statistics, which will pin down the new particle's properties, and is likely to shed light on other mysteries of our universe."

Two independent studies of data produced by smashing proton particles together at CERN's Large Hadron Collider produced a convergent near-certainty on the existence of the new particle.

It is unclear that it is exactly the boson Higgs foresaw, which by bestowing mass on other matter helps explain the way the universe was ordered after the chaos of Big Bang.

In DDC bosons are classed in 539.721 Specific kinds of subatomic particles, which has the including note: "Including bosons . . . ." The LCSH "Bosons" and "Higgs bosons" are both mapped to 539.721.

Examples of works about bosons classed in 539.721 Specific kinds of subatomic particles are The Large Hadron Collider and Higgs Boson Research and Massive: The Missing Particle that Sparked the Greatest Hunt in Science.

For discussion of the Large Hadron Collider itself, see previous blog postings (2007 and 2008).

Derecho!

Inhabitants of the Midwest and Mid-Atlantic regions of the United States have been learning some Spanish this weekend.  Specifically, we have learned the term derecho (“straight”), which a NOAA (National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration) website describes in this manner:

A derecho . . . is a widespread, long-lived wind storm that is associated with a band of rapidly moving showers or thunderstorms.  Although a derecho can produce destruction similar to that of tornadoes, the damage typically is directed in one direction along a relatively straight swath. As a result, the term "straight-line wind damage" sometimes is used to describe derecho damage. By definition, if the wind damage swath extends more than 240 miles (about 400 kilometers) and includes wind gusts of at least 58 mph (93 km/h) or greater along most of its length, then the event may be classified as a derecho.

According to reports from the Washington Post and the New York Times (and as can be verified by most of the Dewey editorial team), Friday afternoon and evening saw a derecho, which formed outside of Chicago at midday, sweep across to the Atlantic Ocean by day’s end—traveling 700 miles (1125 kilometers) in 10 hours.  The associated 60-80 mph (95-125 kph) winds downed many trees, killing more than two dozen people and leaving over 3 million people without power.  Power restoration efforts are estimated to take a week or more.  Meanwhile, the weather is forecast to be hot and humid through the week.  (We are loving our jobs more than usual this week, since at work we have power, Internet access, phone service, and blessed air conditioning.)

A post on the Washington Post Capital Weather Gang blog gives further explanation on the meteorological facts about derechos in general and about this derecho in particular.

Derechos are classed in 551.554 Thermal convective storms, where thunderstorms are in the class-here note.  Fortunately, they are rare enough events not to have produced a monographic literature of their own.   They belong to the kinds of storms described in Severe convective storms, which is classed in that number.   The first chapter of this resource is found here.

EPC Meeting 135

Joan is off in Florence (yes, Florence, Italy, not Florence, Nebraska) speaking at the Global Interoperability and Linked Data in Libraries Seminar, so I’m stepping in to report on last week’s meeting of the Decimal Classification Editorial Policy Committee (EPC)—Meeting 135—held in Dublin (yes, Dublin, Ohio, not Dublin, Ireland—hmm, that just doesn’t have quite the same ring to it, does it?).   Stay tuned for a report from Joan on the Florence meeting later this week.

This EPC meeting had a strong people component to it—and we’re not talking Table 1—08 Groups of people here.  

• EPC welcomed two new committee members:   Pat Riva, Coordinator of the Monographs Section in the Cataloguing Directorate for Heritage Collections (Direction du traitement documentaire des collections patrimoniales) at Bibliothèque et Archives nationales du Québec (BAnQ) in Montreal, Canada, and Gert de Jager,  Subject Cataloguer, Unisa Library, University of South Africa in Pretoria, South Africa.  Incidentally, Pat is also speaking at the Florence seminar.
• EPC celebrated the Queen’s Diamond Jubilee by re-electing Caroline Kent (British Library) as chair and electing Jonathan Furner (UCLA, but, as you may recall, formerly an assistant editor of the DDC) as vice-chair (you can take the Englishman out of the British Isles, but fortunately the accent lingers on).  Jonathan replaces Anne Robertson (Australian Committee on Cataloguing), who had served the maximum number of years as vice-chair.
• EPC passed a resolution congratulating and offering best wishes to Jay Jordan, outgoing president and CEO of OCLC.  As the resolution noted, Jay has “unfailingly [advocated] and [supported] the mission of the Dewey Decimal Classification;” we trust he will remain “a Friend of Dewey.”
• Where’s the picture of all these people? you ask.   Remember our trusty photographer Giles Martin, who retired from his position as assistant editor of the DDC last year and returned home to Australia?   The lack of an official photograph of the EPC meeting is only one of the more visible losses (pun intended) we have suffered with Giles’ relocation to Australia.   (But note that we have not discontinued him!  Giles is still contributing to DDC maintenance and development.)

The agenda included proposals related to modifications to EPC work methods and DDC development (for example, how can data from WorldCat be used to inform development of the DDC?), new editorial rules for segmentation and for oceans and seas, and updates to the classification.   More particularly, a new standard subdivision for archaeology is coming; small updates to the classification in Table 2 Geographic Areas were approved, as were updates in 004-006 Computer science and 330 Economics.  The committee considered discussion papers on Islamic law; the treatment of marriage, partnerships, and unions in the DDC; and the possible adoption of a new taxonomic basis for 583-584 Angiosperms. The committee approved follow-up discussion and consultation on all but the last.

The committee had a wide-ranging discussion on engaging with Dewey users and the role of social media. The agenda also included presentations on modeling topics in the DDC, DDC research, DDC training, edition-level metadata, Dewey linked data, data provenance, upcoming enhancements to WebDewey 2.0, and the virtual chronological/regional religion browser.

Two follow-up electronic meetings have been scheduled:  Meeting 135A will take place the first week in October and will focus on Islamic law, while Meeting 135B has been scheduled for the first week in November to consider a revised proposal on marriage, partnerships, and unions.   The next face-to-face meeting of EPC—Meeting 136—will be held at OCLC headquarters in Dublin, Ohio, 13–14 May 2013.

Transits of Venus

Information about the 2012 transit of Venus--June 5 or 6, depending on where you are--can be found at various web sites, including those of the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA), the National Geographic Daily News ("Transit of Venus 2012--Sun Show Will Be Last for a Century"), and the Royal Observatory at Greenwich.

Here is the Dewey number for transits of Venus:

523.92 Transits of Venus

Two examples of works classed in 523.92 are The Transits of Venus and June 8, 2004: Venus in Transit. (Despite its title, by the way, the second work is not limited to 2004; much of the work treats five Venus transits prior to 2004).

Symbiosis and Mutualism

In previous blog posts ("Evolution" and "Speciation") we looked at works that mentioned ecology but were classed with evolution or a subtopic of evolution; what about works classed with subtopics of ecology?  For example, consider Symbiosis. It has the LCSH:

Symbiosis—Juvenile literature

Here is the summary:

Discusses the three kinds of symbiosis: mutualism, commensalism, and parasitism and describes examples of these relationships.

The examples include microorganisms, plants, and animals.
 
Browsing the Relative Index for "symbiosis" yields:

Symbiosis                             577.85
Symbiosis—animals                 591.785
Symbiosis—factor in evolution   576.85
Symbiosis—plants                   581.785

The schedule entry 577.85 Symbiosis has 577 Ecology in its upward hierarchy.  It has both 577.852 Mutualism (with "commensalism" in the including note) and 577.857 Parasitism in its downward hierarchy.  The entry 577.85 has the class-elsewhere notes "Class symbiosis as a factor affecting evolution in 576.85" and "Class symbiosis in the sense limited to mutually beneficial relationships in 577.852," but neither note is relevant to this work.  The work Symbiosis is classed in 577.85 Symbiosis.

The work Mutualism: Ants and their Insect Partners has the LCSHs:

Mutualism (Biology)
Ants—Ecology
Mutualism (Biology)—Case studies

Browsing the Relative Index for "mutualism" yields:

Mutualism (Biology)         577.852

In the upward hierarchy for 577.852 Mutualism, at 577 Ecology, is the see reference: "For animal ecology, see 591.7."  That see reference has hierarchical force.  In the upward hierarchy for 591.7Animal ecology, animals characteristic of specific environments, at 591 Specific topics in natural history of animals, is the scatter class-elsewhere note: "Class a specific topic in natural history of animals with respect to a specific taxonomic group of animals with the group of animals, plus notation 1 from table under 592–599, e.g., beneficial mammals 599.163."  That class-elsewhere note also has hierarchical force.

Browsing the Relative Index for "ants" yields:

Ants                595.796
. . . . .
Ants—ecology   595.79617

Browsing the Relative Index for "insects" yields:

Insects                595.7
. . . . .
Insects—ecology   595.717

Since the focus of the work is specifically on mutualism relationships of ants with other kinds of insects (rather than on mutualism relationships among all kinds of insects), the correct choice for base number is 595.796 Formicidae (Ants). Mutualism: Ants and their Insect Partners is classed in 595.79617852 Mutualism in ants, built with 595.796 Formicidae (Ants) plus 1 General topics of natural history of animals from add table under 592–599 Specific taxonomic groups of animals, following add instructions at 595.796 and 592–599, plus 7 from 591.7 Animal ecology, animals characteristic of specific environments, following add instruction at notation 1 in add table at 592–599, plus 852 from 577.852 Mutualism, following add instruction at 591.71–591.78 Specific topics in animal ecology; specific environments.  There is no way to express in this number the idea that the partners in mutualism are other kinds of insects.