Search (4 results, page 1 of 1)

0.027786318 = product of:
  0.08335895 = sum of:
    0.08335895 = sum of:
      0.055810746 = weight(_text_:classification in 1441) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.055810746 = score(doc=1441,freq=12.0), product of:
          0.16188543 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
            0.05083213 = queryNorm
          0.3447546 = fieldWeight in 1441, product of:
            3.4641016 = tf(freq=12.0), with freq of:
              12.0 = termFreq=12.0
            3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
            0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=1441)
      0.027548207 = weight(_text_:22 in 1441) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.027548207 = score(doc=1441,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.17800546 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.05083213 = queryNorm
          0.15476047 = fieldWeight in 1441, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=1441)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Abstract

This paper presents a research on syntactic structures known as noun phrases (NP) being applied to increase the effectiveness and efficiency of the mechanisms for the document's classification. Our hypothesis is the fact that the NP can be used instead of single words as a semantic aggregator to reduce the number of words that will be used for the classification system without losing its semantic coverage, increasing its efficiency. The experiment divided the documents classification process in three phases: a) NP preprocessing b) system training; and c) classification experiments. In the first step, a corpus of digitalized texts was submitted to a natural language processing platform1 in which the part-of-speech tagging was done, and them PERL scripts pertaining to the PALAVRAS package were used to extract the Noun Phrases. The preprocessing also involved the tasks of a) removing NP low meaning pre-modifiers, as quantifiers; b) identification of synonyms and corresponding substitution for common hyperonyms; and c) stemming of the relevant words contained in the NP, for similitude checking with other NPs. The first tests with the resulting documents have demonstrated its effectiveness. We have compared the structural similarity of the documents before and after the whole pre-processing steps of phase one. The texts maintained the consistency with the original and have kept the readability. The second phase involves submitting the modified documents to a SVM algorithm to identify clusters and classify the documents. The classification rules are to be established using a machine learning approach. Finally, tests will be conducted to check the effectiveness of the whole process.

Source

Knowledge organization in the 21st century: between historical patterns and future prospects. Proceedings of the Thirteenth International ISKO Conference 19-22 May 2014, Kraków, Poland. Ed.: Wieslaw Babik

0.0067129894 = product of:
  0.020138968 = sum of:
    0.020138968 = product of:
      0.040277936 = sum of:
        0.040277936 = weight(_text_:classification in 3625) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.040277936 = score(doc=3625,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.16188543 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05083213 = queryNorm
            0.24880521 = fieldWeight in 3625, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3625)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Abstract

Knowledge organization (KO) as an activity is, among other meanings, a process for conceptual modeling of knowledge domains that produces a consensual abstraction model of this domain with a particular purpose. It adopts a myriad of techniques to analyze and build efficient knowledge organization systems, and one of these techniques is called sentiment analysis (SA) or opinion mining, which is emerging as promising and useful in a variety of ways. It is based in NLP and AI algorithms, and aims at identifying opinions and emotions toward any person, organization or subject; evaluating them as positive or negative, in both binary and graded fashions. This study sought to show various aspects of the implementation of SA for knowledge organization tasks as register ed in the scientific literature. We began with exploratory bibliographic research and built a corpus of 91 scientific papers, written in English, selected in the LISA Database, between 2000 to 2016. We analyzed these papers and extracted title, year of publication, author(s) and institution(s), title of the journal where they were published, keywords, the LISA classification code, methods/techniques adopted and its application areas. Our main findings are that theoretical papers still prevail, which may indicate a field in the early stages. We found many institutions and authors from Asia, which points to a new shift in world expertise. We concluded that SA is still a novelty in the KO field, being slowly adopted as an aid to the main tasks, as document classification.

0.0066455207 = product of:
  0.019936562 = sum of:
    0.019936562 = product of:
      0.039873123 = sum of:
        0.039873123 = weight(_text_:classification in 139) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.039873123 = score(doc=139,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.16188543 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05083213 = queryNorm
            0.24630459 = fieldWeight in 139, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=139)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Abstract

This paper analyzes previous work on the classification of Knowledge Organization Systems (KOS), discusses strengths and weaknesses, and proposes a new and integrative framework. It argues that current analyses of the KOS tend to be idiosyncratic and incomplete, relying on a limited number of dimensions of analysis. The paper discusses why and how KOS should be classified on a new basis. Based on the available literature and previous work, the authors propose a wider set of dimensions for the analysis of KOS. These are represented in a taxonomy of KOS. Issues arising are discussed.

0.004591368 = product of:
  0.0137741035 = sum of:
    0.0137741035 = product of:
      0.027548207 = sum of:
        0.027548207 = weight(_text_:22 in 1442) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.027548207 = score(doc=1442,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17800546 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05083213 = queryNorm
            0.15476047 = fieldWeight in 1442, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=1442)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Source

Knowledge organization in the 21st century: between historical patterns and future prospects. Proceedings of the Thirteenth International ISKO Conference 19-22 May 2014, Kraków, Poland. Ed.: Wieslaw Babik