Search (4 results, page 1 of 1)

0.0026473717 = product of:
  0.0052947435 = sum of:
    0.0052947435 = product of:
      0.010589487 = sum of:
        0.010589487 = weight(_text_:a in 170) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.010589487 = score(doc=170,freq=10.0), product of:
            0.053105544 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046056706 = queryNorm
            0.19940455 = fieldWeight in 170, product of:
              3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
                10.0 = termFreq=10.0
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=170)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

Ontology is increasingly seen as a key factor for enabling interoperability across heterogeneous systems and semantic web applications. Ontology mapping is required for combining distributed and heterogeneous ontologies. Developing such ontology mapping has been a core issue of recent ontology research. This paper presents ontology mapping categories, describes the characteristics of each category, compares these characteristics, and surveys tools, systems, and related work based on each category of ontology mapping. We believe this paper provides readers with a comprehensive understanding of ontology mapping and points to various research topics about the specific roles of ontology mapping.

Type

a

0.0018909799 = product of:
  0.0037819599 = sum of:
    0.0037819599 = product of:
      0.0075639198 = sum of:
        0.0075639198 = weight(_text_:a in 955) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.0075639198 = score(doc=955,freq=10.0), product of:
            0.053105544 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046056706 = queryNorm
            0.14243183 = fieldWeight in 955, product of:
              3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
                10.0 = termFreq=10.0
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=955)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

Text summarization is a method for data reduction. The use of text summarization enables users to reduce the amount of text that must be read while still assimilating the core information. The data reduction offered by text summarization is particularly useful in the biomedical domain, where physicians must continuously find clinical trial study information to incorporate into their patient treatment efforts. Such efforts are often hampered by the high-volume of publications. This paper presents two independent methods (BioChain and FreqDist) for identifying salient sentences in biomedical texts using concepts derived from domain-specific resources. Our semantic-based method (BioChain) is effective at identifying thematic sentences, while our frequency-distribution method (FreqDist) removes information redundancy. The two methods are then combined to form a hybrid method (ChainFreq). An evaluation of each method is performed using the ROUGE system to compare system-generated summaries against a set of manually-generated summaries. The BioChain and FreqDist methods outperform some common summarization systems, while the ChainFreq method improves upon the base approaches. Our work shows that the best performance is achieved when the two methods are combined. The paper also presents a brief physician's evaluation of three randomly-selected papers from an evaluation corpus to show that the author's abstract does not always reflect the entire contents of the full-text.

Type

a

0.0018909799 = product of:
  0.0037819599 = sum of:
    0.0037819599 = product of:
      0.0075639198 = sum of:
        0.0075639198 = weight(_text_:a in 1031) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.0075639198 = score(doc=1031,freq=10.0), product of:
            0.053105544 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046056706 = queryNorm
            0.14243183 = fieldWeight in 1031, product of:
              3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
                10.0 = termFreq=10.0
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1031)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

Stereotyping is a technique used in many information systems to represent user groups and/or to generate initial individual user models. However, there has been a lack of evidence on the accuracy of their use in representing users. We propose a formal evaluation method to test the accuracy or homogeneity of the stereotypes that are based on users' explicit characteristics. Using the method, the results of an empirical testing on 11 common user stereotypes of information retrieval (IR) systems are reported. The participants' memberships in the stereotypes were predicted using discriminant analysis, based on their IR knowledge. The actual membership and the predicted membership of each stereotype were compared. The data show that "librarians/IR professionals" is an accurate stereotype in representing its members, while some others, such as "undergraduate students" and "social sciences/humanities" users, are not accurate stereotypes. The data also demonstrate that based on the user's IR knowledge a stereotype can be made more accurate or homogeneous. The results show the promise that our method can help better detect the differences among stereotype members, and help with better stereotype design and user modeling. We assume that accurate stereotypes have better performance in user modeling and thus the system performance. Limitations and future directions of the study are discussed.

Type

a

0.0016913437 = product of:
  0.0033826875 = sum of:
    0.0033826875 = product of:
      0.006765375 = sum of:
        0.006765375 = weight(_text_:a in 4179) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.006765375 = score(doc=4179,freq=8.0), product of:
            0.053105544 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046056706 = queryNorm
            0.12739488 = fieldWeight in 4179, 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=4179)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

A sight-centered digital library (DL) design with complex structures and multimedia formats poses significant challenges for blind users. This study is the first attempt to investigate the top three help-seeking situations as well as associated factors in blind users' DL interactions. A mixed-method approach was adopted for this study. Multiple methods were applied to collect data from 30 blind subjects: questionnaires, presearch interviews, think aloud protocols, transaction logs, and postsearch interviews. The paper identifies the top three help-seeking situations, and associated factors in relation to user, system, task, and interaction. Moreover, different types of main-level factors were tested to investigate if they are correlated to each type of top situation, and qualitative data of sublevel factors offer insight into how these factors are associated with various situations. Without a clear understanding of these situations and factors, the objective of universal access to information in DLs cannot be achieved. DL design implications are further discussed with the goal of providing system design recommendations for reducing blind users' help-seeking situations.

Type

a