Search (3 results, page 1 of 1)

  • × author_ss:"Wang, X."
  • × language_ss:"e"
  • × type_ss:"a"
  • × year_i:[2020 TO 2030}
  1. Tan, X.; Luo, X.; Wang, X.; Wang, H.; Hou, X.: Representation and display of digital images of cultural heritage : a semantic enrichment approach (2021) 0.03
    0.03165855 = product of:
      0.1266342 = sum of:
        0.1266342 = weight(_text_:digital in 455) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.1266342 = score(doc=455,freq=12.0), product of:
            0.19770671 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.944552 = idf(docFreq=2326, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050121464 = queryNorm
            0.6405154 = fieldWeight in 455, product of:
              3.4641016 = tf(freq=12.0), with freq of:
                12.0 = termFreq=12.0
              3.944552 = idf(docFreq=2326, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=455)
      0.25 = coord(1/4)
    
    Abstract
    Digital images of cultural heritage (CH) contain rich semantic information. However, today's semantic representations of CH images fail to fully reveal the content entities and context within these vital surrogates. This paper draws on the fields of image research and digital humanities to propose a systematic methodology and a technical route for semantic enrichment of CH digital images. This new methodology systematically applies a series of procedures including: semantic annotation, entity-based enrichment, establishing internal relations, event-centric enrichment, defining hierarchy relations between properties text annotation, and finally, named entity recognition in order to ultimately provide fine-grained contextual semantic content disclosure. The feasibility and advantages of the proposed semantic enrichment methods for semantic representation are demonstrated via a visual display platform for digital images of CH built to represent the Wutai Mountain Map, a typical Dunhuang mural. This study proves that semantic enrichment offers a promising new model for exposing content at a fine-grained level, and establishing a rich semantic network centered on the content of digital images of CH.
  2. Walsh, J.A.; Cobb, P.J.; Fremery, W. de; Golub, K.; Keah, H.; Kim, J.; Kiplang'at, J.; Liu, Y.-H.; Mahony, S.; Oh, S.G.; Sula, C.A.; Underwood, T.; Wang, X.: Digital humanities in the iSchool (2022) 0.02
    0.024083475 = product of:
      0.0963339 = sum of:
        0.0963339 = weight(_text_:digital in 463) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.0963339 = score(doc=463,freq=10.0), product of:
            0.19770671 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.944552 = idf(docFreq=2326, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050121464 = queryNorm
            0.4872566 = fieldWeight in 463, product of:
              3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
                10.0 = termFreq=10.0
              3.944552 = idf(docFreq=2326, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=463)
      0.25 = coord(1/4)
    
    Abstract
    The interdisciplinary field known as digital humanities (DH) is represented in various forms in the teaching and research practiced in iSchools. Building on the work of an iSchools organization committee charged with exploring digital humanities curricula, we present findings from a series of related studies exploring aspects of DH teaching, education, and research in iSchools, often in collaboration with other units and disciplines. Through a survey of iSchool programs and an online DH course registry, we investigate the various education models for DH training found in iSchools, followed by a detailed look at DH courses and curricula, explored through analysis of course syllabi and course descriptions. We take a brief look at collaborative disciplines with which iSchools cooperate on DH research projects or in offering DH education. Next, we explore DH careers through an analysis of relevant job advertisements. Finally, we offer some observations about the management and administrative challenges and opportunities related to offering a new iSchool DH program. Our results provide a snapshot of the current state of digital humanities in iSchools which may usefully inform the design and evolution of new DH programs, degrees, and related initiatives.
    Series
    JASIST special issue on digital humanities (DH): A. Landscapes of DH
  3. Wang, X.; Song, N.; Zhou, H.; Cheng, H.: ¬The representation of argumentation in scientific papers : a comparative analysis of two research areas (2022) 0.00
    0.004785695 = product of:
      0.01914278 = sum of:
        0.01914278 = weight(_text_:library in 567) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.01914278 = score(doc=567,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.1317883 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050121464 = queryNorm
            0.14525402 = fieldWeight in 567, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=567)
      0.25 = coord(1/4)
    
    Abstract
    Scientific papers are essential manifestations of evolving scientific knowledge, and arguments are an important avenue to communicate research results. This study aims to understand how the argumentation process is represented in scientific papers, which is important for knowledge representation, discovery, and retrieval. First, based on fundamental argument theory and scientific discourse ontologies, a coding schema, including 17 categories was constructed. Thereafter, annotation experiments were conducted with 40 scientific articles randomly selected from two different research areas (library and information science and biomedical sciences). Statistical analysis and the sequential pattern mining method were then employed; the ratio of different argumentation units and evidence types were calculated, the argumentation semantics of figures and tables analyzed, and the argumentation structures extracted. A correlation analysis between argumentation and rhetorical structures was also performed to further reveal how argumentation was represented within scientific discourses. The results indicated a difference in the proportion of the argumentation units in the two types of scientific papers, as well as a similar linear construction with differences in the specific argument structures of each knowledge domain and a clear correlation between argumentation and rhetorical structure.