Diese Datenbank enthält über 40.000 Dokumente zu Themen aus den Bereichen Formalerschließung – Inhaltserschließung – Information Retrieval.
© 2015 W. Gödert, TH Köln, Institut für Informationswissenschaft / Powered by litecat, BIS Oldenburg (Stand: 03. März 2020)
1Korman, D.Z. ; Mack, E. ; Jett, J. ; Renear, A.H.: Defining textual entailment.
In: Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology. 69(2018) no.6, S.763-772.
Abstract: Textual entailment is a relationship that obtains between fragments of text when one fragment in some sense implies the other fragment. The automation of textual entailment recognition supports a wide variety of text-based tasks, including information retrieval, information extraction, question answering, text summarization, and machine translation. Much ingenuity has been devoted to developing algorithms for identifying textual entailments, but relatively little to saying what textual entailment actually is. This article is a review of the logical and philosophical issues involved in providing an adequate definition of textual entailment. We show that many natural definitions of textual entailment are refuted by counterexamples, including the most widely cited definition of Dagan et al. We then articulate and defend the following revised definition: T textually entails H?=?df typically, a human reading T would be justified in inferring the proposition expressed by H from the proposition expressed by T. We also show that textual entailment is context-sensitive, nontransitive, and nonmonotonic.
Inhalt: Vgl.: https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1002/asi.24007.
2Renear, A.H. ; Wickett, K.M. ; Urban, R.J. ; Dubin, D. ; Shreeves, S.L.: Collection/item metadata relationships.
In: Metadata for semantic and social applications : proceedings of the International Conference on Dublin Core and Metadata Applications, Berlin, 22 - 26 September 2008, DC 2008: Berlin, Germany / ed. by Jane Greenberg and Wolfgang Klas. Göttingen : Univ.-Verl., 2008. S.80-89.
Abstract: Contemporary retrieval systems, which search across collections, usually ignore collection-level metadata. Alternative approaches, exploiting collection-level information, will require an understanding of the various kinds of relationships that can obtain between collection-level and item-level metadata. This paper outlines the problem and describes a project that is developing a logic-based framework for classifying collection/item metadata relationships. This framework will support (i) metadata specification developers defining metadata elements, (ii) metadata creators describing objects, and (iii) system designers implementing systems that take advantage of collection-level metadata. We present three examples of collection/item metadata relationship categories, attribute/value-propagation, value-propagation, and value-constraint and show that even in these simple cases a precise formulation requires modal notions in addition to first-order logic. These formulations are related to recent work in information retrieval and ontology evaluation.
Inhalt: Vgl. unter: http://dcpapers.dublincore.org/ojs/pubs/article/view/921/917.
Themenfeld: Metadaten ; Wissensrepräsentation
Objekt: Dublin Core
3Coombs, J.H. ; Renear, A.H. ; DeRose, S.J.: Markup systems and the future of scholarly text processing.
In: Communications of the Association for Computing Machinery. 30(1987), S.933-947.
Abstract: An influential analysis of text-markup systems and arguments for the use of descriptive markup in machine-readable texts
Anmerkung: Reprinted in: The digital world: text-based computing in the humanities. Ed.: G. Landow et al. Cambridge: MIT Pr. 1993, S.85-118
Themenfeld: Elektronisches Publizieren