Search (4 results, page 1 of 1)

0.045330603 = product of:
  0.1586571 = sum of:
    0.1254966 = weight(_text_:brain in 2780) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.1254966 = score(doc=2780,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.2736591 = queryWeight, product of:
          6.9177637 = idf(docFreq=118, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0395589 = queryNorm
        0.4585873 = fieldWeight in 2780, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          6.9177637 = idf(docFreq=118, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2780)
    0.03316051 = weight(_text_:ed in 2780) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.03316051 = score(doc=2780,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.140671 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.5559888 = idf(docFreq=3431, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0395589 = queryNorm
        0.23573098 = fieldWeight in 2780, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.5559888 = idf(docFreq=3431, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2780)
  0.2857143 = coord(2/7)

Abstract

Connectionist models or neural networksare a type of AI technique that is based an small interconnected processing nodes which yield an overall behaviour that is intelligent. They have a very broad utility. In IR, they have been used in filtering information, query expansion, relevance feedback, clustering terms or documents, the topological organization of documents, labeling groups of documents, interface design, reduction of document dimension, the classification of the terms in a brain-storming session, etc. The present work is a fairly exhaustive study and classification of the application of this type of technique to IR. For this purpose, we focus an the main publications in the area of IR and neural networks, as well as an some applications of our own design.

Source

Challenges in knowledge representation and organization for the 21st century: Integration of knowledge across boundaries. Proceedings of the 7th ISKO International Conference Granada, Spain, July 10-13, 2002. Ed.: M. López-Huertas

0.015624099 = product of:
  0.10936869 = sum of:
    0.10936869 = weight(_text_:global in 1814) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.10936869 = score(doc=1814,freq=8.0), product of:
        0.19788647 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.002325 = idf(docFreq=807, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0395589 = queryNorm
        0.552684 = fieldWeight in 1814, product of:
          2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
            8.0 = termFreq=8.0
          5.002325 = idf(docFreq=807, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1814)
  0.14285715 = coord(1/7)

Abstract

Using Scopus data, we construct a global map of science based on aggregated journal-journal citations from 1996-2012 (N of journals?=?20,554). This base map enables users to overlay downloads from Scopus interactively. Using a single year (e.g., 2012), results can be compared with mappings based on the Journal Citation Reports at the Web of Science (N?=?10,936). The Scopus maps are more detailed at both the local and global levels because of their greater coverage, including, for example, the arts and humanities. The base maps can be interactively overlaid with journal distributions in sets downloaded from Scopus, for example, for the purpose of portfolio analysis. Rao-Stirling diversity can be used as a measure of interdisciplinarity in the sets under study. Maps at the global and the local level, however, can be very different because of the different levels of aggregation involved. Two journals, for example, can both belong to the humanities in the global map, but participate in different specialty structures locally. The base map and interactive tools are available online (with instructions) at http://www.leydesdorff.net/scopus_ovl.

0.0078120497 = product of:
  0.054684345 = sum of:
    0.054684345 = weight(_text_:global in 3090) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.054684345 = score(doc=3090,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.19788647 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.002325 = idf(docFreq=807, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0395589 = queryNorm
        0.276342 = fieldWeight in 3090, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          5.002325 = idf(docFreq=807, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3090)
  0.14285715 = coord(1/7)

Abstract

We compare the network of aggregated journal-journal citation relations provided by the Journal Citation Reports (JCR) 2012 of the Science Citation Index (SCI) and Social Sciences Citation Index (SSCI) with similar data based on Scopus 2012. First, global and overlay maps were developed for the 2 sets separately. Using fuzzy-string matching and ISSN numbers, we were able to match 10,524 journal names between the 2 sets: 96.4% of the 10,936 journals contained in JCR, or 51.2% of the 20,554 journals covered by Scopus. Network analysis was pursued on the set of journals shared between the 2 databases and the 2 sets of unique journals. Citations among the shared journals are more comprehensively covered in JCR than in Scopus, so the network in JCR is denser and more connected than in Scopus. The ranking of shared journals in terms of indegree (i.e., numbers of citing journals) or total citations is similar in both databases overall (Spearman rank correlation ??>?0.97), but some individual journals rank very differently. Journals that are unique to Scopus seem to be less important-they are citing shared journals rather than being cited by them-but the humanities are covered better in Scopus than in JCR.

0.00394768 = product of:
  0.027633758 = sum of:
    0.027633758 = weight(_text_:ed in 2756) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.027633758 = score(doc=2756,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.140671 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.5559888 = idf(docFreq=3431, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0395589 = queryNorm
        0.19644247 = fieldWeight in 2756, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.5559888 = idf(docFreq=3431, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2756)
  0.14285715 = coord(1/7)

Source

Challenges in knowledge representation and organization for the 21st century: Integration of knowledge across boundaries. Proceedings of the 7th ISKO International Conference Granada, Spain, July 10-13, 2002. Ed.: M. López-Huertas