Search (3 results, page 1 of 1)

  • × author_ss:"Farazi, F."
  1. Maltese, V.; Farazi, F.: Towards the integration of knowledge organization systems with the linked data cloud (2011) 0.00
    0.0020714647 = product of:
      0.0041429293 = sum of:
        0.0041429293 = product of:
          0.008285859 = sum of:
            0.008285859 = weight(_text_:a in 4815) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.008285859 = score(doc=4815,freq=12.0), product of:
                0.053105544 = queryWeight, product of:
                  1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.046056706 = queryNorm
                0.15602624 = fieldWeight in 4815, product of:
                  3.4641016 = tf(freq=12.0), with freq of:
                    12.0 = termFreq=12.0
                  1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4815)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Abstract
    In representing the shared view of all the people involved, building a knowledge organization system (KOS) from scratch is extremely costly, and it is therefore fundamental to reuse existing resources. This can be done by progressively extending the KOS with knowledge coming from similar KOSs and by promoting interoperability among them. The linked data initiative is indeed encouraging people to share and integrate their datasets into a giant network of interconnected resources. This enables different applications to interoperate and share their data. The integration should take into account the purpose of the datasets, however, and make explicit the semantics. In fact, the difference in the purpose is reflected in the difference in the semantics. With this paper we (a) highlight the potential problems that may arise by not taking into account purpose and semantics; (b) make clear how the difference in the purpose is reflected in totally different semantics and (c) provide an algorithm to translate from one semantics into another as a preliminary step towards the integration of ontologies designed for different purposes. This will allow reusing the ontologies even in contexts different from those in which they were designed.
    Source
    Classification and ontology: formal approaches and access to knowledge: proceedings of the International UDC Seminar, 19-20 September 2011, The Hague, The Netherlands. Eds.: A. Slavic u. E. Civallero
    Type
    a
  2. Giunchiglia, F.; Zaihrayeu, I.; Farazi, F.: Converting classifications into OWL ontologies (2009) 0.00
    0.001757696 = product of:
      0.003515392 = sum of:
        0.003515392 = product of:
          0.007030784 = sum of:
            0.007030784 = weight(_text_:a in 4690) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.007030784 = score(doc=4690,freq=6.0), product of:
                0.053105544 = queryWeight, product of:
                  1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.046056706 = queryNorm
                0.13239266 = fieldWeight in 4690, product of:
                  2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
                    6.0 = termFreq=6.0
                  1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4690)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Abstract
    Classification schemes, such as the DMoZ web directory, provide a convenient and intuitive way for humans to access classified contents. While being easy to be dealt with for humans, classification schemes remain hard to be reasoned about by automated software agents. Among other things, this hardness is conditioned by the ambiguous na- ture of the natural language used to describe classification categories. In this paper we describe how classification schemes can be converted into OWL ontologies, thus enabling reasoning on them by Semantic Web applications. The proposed solution is based on a two phase approach in which category names are first encoded in a concept language and then, together with the structure of the classification scheme, are converted into an OWL ontology. We demonstrate the practical applicability of our approach by showing how the results of reasoning on these OWL ontologies can help improve the organization and use of web directories.
  3. Maltese, V.; Farazi, F.: Towards the integration of knowledge organization systems with the linked data cloud (2011) 0.00
    0.0016913437 = product of:
      0.0033826875 = sum of:
        0.0033826875 = product of:
          0.006765375 = sum of:
            0.006765375 = weight(_text_:a in 602) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.006765375 = score(doc=602,freq=8.0), product of:
                0.053105544 = queryWeight, product of:
                  1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.046056706 = queryNorm
                0.12739488 = fieldWeight in 602, product of:
                  2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
                    8.0 = termFreq=8.0
                  1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=602)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Abstract
    In representing the shared view of all the people involved, building a Knowledge Organization System (KOS) from scratch is extremely costly, and it is therefore fundamental to reuse existing resources. This can be done by progressively extending the KOS with knowledge coming from similar KOS and by promoting interoperability among them. The linked data initiative is indeed fostering people to share and integrate their datasets into a giant network of interconnected resources. This enables different applications to interoperate and share their data. However, the integration should take into account the purpose of the datasets and make explicit the semantics. In fact, the difference in the purpose is reflected in the difference in the semantics. With this paper we (a) highlight the potential problems that may arise by not taking into account purpose and semantics, (b) make clear how the difference in the purpose is reflected in totally different semantics and (c) provide an algorithm to translate from one semantic into another as a preliminary step towards the integration of ontologies designed for different purposes. This will allow reusing the ontologies even in contexts different from those in which they were designed.