Search (3 results, page 1 of 1)

0.0018577921 = product of:
  0.0037155843 = sum of:
    0.0037155843 = product of:
      0.0074311686 = sum of:
        0.0074311686 = weight(_text_:a in 4394) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.0074311686 = score(doc=4394,freq=10.0), product of:
            0.043477926 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.037706986 = queryNorm
            0.1709182 = fieldWeight in 4394, product of:
              3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
                10.0 = termFreq=10.0
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4394)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

Purpose - To propose a categorization of the different conflation procedures at the two basic approaches, non-linguistic and linguistic techniques, and to justify the application of normalization methods within the framework of linguistic techniques. Design/methodology/approach - Presents a range of term conflation methods, that can be used in information retrieval. The uniterm and multiterm variants can be considered equivalent units for the purposes of automatic indexing. Stemming algorithms, segmentation rules, association measures and clustering techniques are well evaluated non-linguistic methods, and experiments with these techniques show a wide variety of results. Alternatively, the lemmatisation and the use of syntactic pattern-matching, through equivalence relations represented in finite-state transducers (FST), are emerging methods for the recognition and standardization of terms. Findings - The survey attempts to point out the positive and negative effects of the linguistic approach and its potential as a term conflation method. Originality/value - Outlines the importance of FSTs for the normalization of term variants.

Type

a

0.0016616598 = product of:
  0.0033233196 = sum of:
    0.0033233196 = product of:
      0.006646639 = sum of:
        0.006646639 = weight(_text_:a in 5599) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.006646639 = score(doc=5599,freq=8.0), product of:
            0.043477926 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.037706986 = queryNorm
            0.15287387 = fieldWeight in 5599, product of:
              2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
                8.0 = termFreq=8.0
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=5599)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

Purpose - To evaluate the accuracy of conflation methods based on finite-state transducers (FSTs). Design/methodology/approach - Incorrectly lemmatized and stemmed forms may lead to the retrieval of inappropriate documents. Experimental studies to date have focused on retrieval performance, but very few on conflation performance. The process of normalization we used involved a linguistic toolbox that allowed us to construct, through graphic interfaces, electronic dictionaries represented internally by FSTs. The lexical resources developed were applied to a Spanish test corpus for merging term variants in canonical lemmatized forms. Conflation performance was evaluated in terms of an adaptation of recall and precision measures, based on accuracy and coverage, not actual retrieval. The results were compared with those obtained using a Spanish version of the Porter algorithm. Findings - The conclusion is that the main strength of lemmatization is its accuracy, whereas its main limitation is the underanalysis of variant forms. Originality/value - The report outlines the potential of transducers in their application to normalization processes.

Type

a

0.0013847164 = product of:
  0.0027694327 = sum of:
    0.0027694327 = product of:
      0.0055388655 = sum of:
        0.0055388655 = weight(_text_:a in 614) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.0055388655 = score(doc=614,freq=8.0), product of:
            0.043477926 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.037706986 = queryNorm
            0.12739488 = fieldWeight in 614, 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=614)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

This article shows how finite-state methods can be employed in a new and different task: the conflation of personal name variants in standard forms. In bibliographic databases and citation index systems, variant forms create problems of inaccuracy that affect information retrieval, the quality of information from databases, and the citation statistics used for the evaluation of scientists' work. A number of approximate string matching techniques have been developed to validate variant forms, based on similarity and equivalence relations. We classify the personal name variants as nonvalid and valid forms. In establishing an equivalence relation between valid variants and the standard form of its equivalence class, we defend the application of finite-state transducers. The process of variant identification requires the elaboration of: (a) binary matrices and (b) finite-state graphs. This procedure was tested on samples of author names from bibliographic records, selected from the Library and Information Science Abstracts and Science Citation Index Expanded databases. The evaluation involved calculating the measures of precision and recall, based on completeness and accuracy. The results demonstrate the usefulness of this approach, although it should be complemented with methods based on similarity relations for the recognition of spelling variants and misspellings.

Type

a