-
Evens, M.: Thesaural relations in information retrieval (2002)
0.01
0.012989433 = product of:
0.06061735 = sum of:
0.016133383 = weight(_text_:system in 1201) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.016133383 = score(doc=1201,freq=2.0), product of:
0.07727166 = queryWeight, product of:
3.1495528 = idf(docFreq=5152, maxDocs=44218)
0.02453417 = queryNorm
0.20878783 = fieldWeight in 1201, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.1495528 = idf(docFreq=5152, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1201)
0.011207362 = weight(_text_:information in 1201) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.011207362 = score(doc=1201,freq=10.0), product of:
0.04306919 = queryWeight, product of:
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.02453417 = queryNorm
0.2602176 = fieldWeight in 1201, product of:
3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
10.0 = termFreq=10.0
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1201)
0.033276606 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 1201) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.033276606 = score(doc=1201,freq=10.0), product of:
0.07421378 = queryWeight, product of:
3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
0.02453417 = queryNorm
0.44838852 = fieldWeight in 1201, product of:
3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
10.0 = termFreq=10.0
3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1201)
0.21428572 = coord(3/14)
- Abstract
- Thesaural relations have long been used in information retrieval to enrich queries; they have sometimes been used to cluster documents as well. Sometimes the first query to an information retrieval system yields no results at all, or, what can be even more disconcerting, many thousands of hits. One solution is to rephrase the query, improving the choice of query terms by using related terms of different types. A collection of related terms is often called a thesaurus. This chapter describes the lexical-semantic relations that have been used in building thesauri and summarizes some of the effects of using these relational thesauri in information retrieval experiments
- Series
- Information science and knowledge management; vol.3
- Theme
- Semantisches Umfeld in Indexierung u. Retrieval
-
Jouis, C.: Logic of relationships (2002)
0.01
0.0091177765 = product of:
0.042549625 = sum of:
0.030062785 = weight(_text_:system in 1204) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.030062785 = score(doc=1204,freq=10.0), product of:
0.07727166 = queryWeight, product of:
3.1495528 = idf(docFreq=5152, maxDocs=44218)
0.02453417 = queryNorm
0.38905317 = fieldWeight in 1204, product of:
3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
10.0 = termFreq=10.0
3.1495528 = idf(docFreq=5152, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1204)
0.004176737 = weight(_text_:information in 1204) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.004176737 = score(doc=1204,freq=2.0), product of:
0.04306919 = queryWeight, product of:
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.02453417 = queryNorm
0.09697737 = fieldWeight in 1204, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1204)
0.008310104 = product of:
0.016620208 = sum of:
0.016620208 = weight(_text_:22 in 1204) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.016620208 = score(doc=1204,freq=2.0), product of:
0.085914485 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.02453417 = queryNorm
0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 1204, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1204)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.21428572 = coord(3/14)
- Abstract
- A main goal of recent studies in semantics is to integrate into conceptual structures the models of representation used in linguistics, logic, and/or artificial intelligence. A fundamental problem resides in the need to structure knowledge and then to check the validity of constructed representations. We propose associating logical properties with relationships by introducing the relationships into a typed and functional system of specifcations. This makes it possible to compare conceptual representations against the relationships established between the concepts. The mandatory condition to validate such a conceptual representation is consistency. The semantic system proposed is based an a structured set of semantic primitives-types, relations, and properties-based an a global model of language processing, Applicative and Cognitive Grammar (ACG) (Desc16s, 1990), and an extension of this model to terminology (Jouis & Mustafa 1995, 1996, 1997). The ACG postulates three levels of representation of languages, including a cognitive level. At this level, the meanings of lexical predicates are represented by semantic cognitive schemes. From this perspective, we propose a set of semantic concepts, which defines an organized system of meanings. Relations are part of a specification network based an a general terminological scheure (i.e., a coherent system of meanings of relations). In such a system, a specific relation may be characterized as to its: (1) functional type (the semantic type of arguments of the relation); (2) algebraic properties (reflexivity, symmetry, transitivity, etc.); and (3) combinatorial relations with other entities in the same context (for instance, the part of the text where a concept is defined).
- Date
- 1.12.2002 11:12:22
- Series
- Information science and knowledge management; vol.3
-
Khoo, C.; Myaeng, S.H.: Identifying semantic relations in text for information retrieval and information extraction (2002)
0.01
0.0057074665 = product of:
0.039952263 = sum of:
0.014176315 = weight(_text_:information in 1197) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.014176315 = score(doc=1197,freq=16.0), product of:
0.04306919 = queryWeight, product of:
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.02453417 = queryNorm
0.3291521 = fieldWeight in 1197, product of:
4.0 = tf(freq=16.0), with freq of:
16.0 = termFreq=16.0
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1197)
0.025775949 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 1197) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.025775949 = score(doc=1197,freq=6.0), product of:
0.07421378 = queryWeight, product of:
3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
0.02453417 = queryNorm
0.34732026 = fieldWeight in 1197, product of:
2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
6.0 = termFreq=6.0
3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1197)
0.14285715 = coord(2/14)
- Abstract
- Automatic identification of semantic relations in text is a difficult problem, but is important for many applications. It has been used for relation matching in information retrieval to retrieve documents that contain not only the concepts but also the relations between concepts specified in the user's query. It is an integral part of information extraction-extracting from natural language text, facts or pieces of information related to a particular event or topic. Other potential applications are in the construction of relational thesauri (semantic networks of related concepts) and other kinds of knowledge bases, and in natural language processing applications such as machine translation and computer comprehension of text. This chapter examines the main methods used for identifying semantic relations automatically and their application in information retrieval and information extraction.
- Series
- Information science and knowledge management; vol.3
-
Hetzler, B.: Visual analysis and exploration of relationships (2002)
0.01
0.005553837 = product of:
0.038876858 = sum of:
0.014323224 = weight(_text_:information in 1189) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.014323224 = score(doc=1189,freq=12.0), product of:
0.04306919 = queryWeight, product of:
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.02453417 = queryNorm
0.3325631 = fieldWeight in 1189, product of:
3.4641016 = tf(freq=12.0), with freq of:
12.0 = termFreq=12.0
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=1189)
0.024553634 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 1189) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.024553634 = score(doc=1189,freq=4.0), product of:
0.07421378 = queryWeight, product of:
3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
0.02453417 = queryNorm
0.33085006 = fieldWeight in 1189, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=1189)
0.14285715 = coord(2/14)
- Abstract
- Relationships can provide a rich and powerful set of information and can be used to accomplish application goals, such as information retrieval and natural language processing. A growing trend in the information science community is the use of information visualization-taking advantage of people's natural visual capabilities to perceive and understand complex information. This chapter explores how visualization and visual exploration can help users gain insight from known relationships and discover evidence of new relationships not previously anticipated.
- Series
- Information science and knowledge management; vol.3
- Theme
- Semantisches Umfeld in Indexierung u. Retrieval
-
Casagrande, J.B.; Hale, K.L.: Semantic relations in Papago folk definitions (1967)
0.00
0.0047366275 = product of:
0.03315639 = sum of:
0.008353474 = weight(_text_:information in 1194) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.008353474 = score(doc=1194,freq=2.0), product of:
0.04306919 = queryWeight, product of:
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.02453417 = queryNorm
0.19395474 = fieldWeight in 1194, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=1194)
0.024802918 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 1194) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.024802918 = score(doc=1194,freq=2.0), product of:
0.07421378 = queryWeight, product of:
3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
0.02453417 = queryNorm
0.33420905 = fieldWeight in 1194, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=1194)
0.14285715 = coord(2/14)
- Footnote
- Zitiert in: Evens, M.: Thesaural relations in information retrieval. In: The semantics of relationships: an interdisciplinary perspective. Eds: R. Green u.a. Dordrecht: Kluwer 2002. S.143-160.
-
Hjoerland, B.: Concept theory (2009)
0.00
0.0033502954 = product of:
0.023452066 = sum of:
0.011050607 = weight(_text_:information in 3461) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.011050607 = score(doc=3461,freq=14.0), product of:
0.04306919 = queryWeight, product of:
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.02453417 = queryNorm
0.256578 = fieldWeight in 3461, product of:
3.7416575 = tf(freq=14.0), with freq of:
14.0 = termFreq=14.0
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3461)
0.012401459 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 3461) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.012401459 = score(doc=3461,freq=2.0), product of:
0.07421378 = queryWeight, product of:
3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
0.02453417 = queryNorm
0.16710453 = fieldWeight in 3461, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3461)
0.14285715 = coord(2/14)
- Abstract
- Concept theory is an extremely broad, interdisciplinary and complex field of research related to many deep fields with very long historical traditions without much consensus. However, information science and knowledge organization cannot avoid relating to theories of concepts. Knowledge organizing systems (e.g., classification systems, thesauri, and ontologies) should be understood as systems basically organizing concepts and their semantic relations. The same is the case with information retrieval systems. Different theories of concepts have different implications for how to construe, evaluate, and use such systems. Based on a post-Kuhnian view of paradigms, this article put forward arguments that the best understanding and classification of theories of concepts is to view and classify them in accordance with epistemological theories (empiricism, rationalism, historicism, and pragmatism). It is also argued that the historicist and pragmatist understandings of concepts are the most fruitful views and that this understanding may be part of a broader paradigm shift that is also beginning to take place in information science. The importance of historicist and pragmatic theories of concepts for information science is outlined.
- Footnote
- Vgl.: Szostak, R.: Comment on Hjørland's concept theory in: Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 61(2010) no.5, S. 1076-1077 und die Erwiderung darauf von B. Hjoerland (S.1078-1080)
- Source
- Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 60(2009) no.8, S.1519-1536
- Theme
- Information
-
Nakamura, Y.: Subdivisions vs. conjunctions : a discussion on concept theory (1998)
0.00
0.0033156392 = product of:
0.023209473 = sum of:
0.0058474317 = weight(_text_:information in 69) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.0058474317 = score(doc=69,freq=2.0), product of:
0.04306919 = queryWeight, product of:
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.02453417 = queryNorm
0.13576832 = fieldWeight in 69, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=69)
0.017362041 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 69) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.017362041 = score(doc=69,freq=2.0), product of:
0.07421378 = queryWeight, product of:
3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
0.02453417 = queryNorm
0.23394634 = fieldWeight in 69, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=69)
0.14285715 = coord(2/14)
- Abstract
- After studying the relations between two words(nouns) that constitute a compound term, the relation between corresponding concepts discussed. The impossibility of having a conjunction between two concepts that have no common feature causes inconvenience in the application of concept theory to information retrieval problems. Another kind of conjunctions, different from that by co-occurrence, is proposed and characteristics of this conjunction is studied. It revealed that one of new ones has the same character with colon combination in UDC. The possibility of having three kinds of conjunction including Wsterian concept conjunction is presented. It is also discussed that subdivisions can be replaced by new conjunctions
-
Hovy, E.: Comparing sets of semantic relations in ontologies (2002)
0.00
0.0028419765 = product of:
0.019893834 = sum of:
0.0050120843 = weight(_text_:information in 2178) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.0050120843 = score(doc=2178,freq=2.0), product of:
0.04306919 = queryWeight, product of:
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.02453417 = queryNorm
0.116372846 = fieldWeight in 2178, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2178)
0.014881751 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 2178) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.014881751 = score(doc=2178,freq=2.0), product of:
0.07421378 = queryWeight, product of:
3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
0.02453417 = queryNorm
0.20052543 = fieldWeight in 2178, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2178)
0.14285715 = coord(2/14)
- Series
- Information science and knowledge management; vol.3
- Theme
- Semantisches Umfeld in Indexierung u. Retrieval
-
O'Neill, E.T.; Kammerer, K.A.; Bennett, R.: ¬The aboutness of words (2017)
0.00
0.0028419765 = product of:
0.019893834 = sum of:
0.0050120843 = weight(_text_:information in 3835) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.0050120843 = score(doc=3835,freq=2.0), product of:
0.04306919 = queryWeight, product of:
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.02453417 = queryNorm
0.116372846 = fieldWeight in 3835, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=3835)
0.014881751 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 3835) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.014881751 = score(doc=3835,freq=2.0), product of:
0.07421378 = queryWeight, product of:
3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
0.02453417 = queryNorm
0.20052543 = fieldWeight in 3835, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=3835)
0.14285715 = coord(2/14)
- Abstract
- Word aboutness is defined as the relationship between words and subjects associated with them. An aboutness coefficient is developed to estimate the strength of the aboutness relationship. Words that are randomly distributed across subjects are assumed to lack aboutness and the degree to which their usage deviates from a random pattern indicates the strength of the aboutness. To estimate aboutness, title words and their associated subjects are extracted from the titles of non-fiction English language books in the OCLC WorldCat database. The usage patterns of the title words are analyzed and used to compute aboutness coefficients for each of the common title words. Words with low aboutness coefficients (An and In) are commonly found in stop word lists, whereas words with high aboutness coefficients (Carbonate, Autism) are unambiguous and have a strong subject association. The aboutness coefficient potentially can enhance indexing, advance authority control, and improve retrieval.
- Source
- Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology. 68(2017) no.10, S.2471-2483
-
Olson, H.A.: How we construct subjects : a feminist analysis (2007)
0.00
0.0022206323 = product of:
0.015544426 = sum of:
0.0072343214 = weight(_text_:information in 5588) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.0072343214 = score(doc=5588,freq=6.0), product of:
0.04306919 = queryWeight, product of:
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.02453417 = queryNorm
0.16796975 = fieldWeight in 5588, product of:
2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
6.0 = termFreq=6.0
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=5588)
0.008310104 = product of:
0.016620208 = sum of:
0.016620208 = weight(_text_:22 in 5588) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.016620208 = score(doc=5588,freq=2.0), product of:
0.085914485 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.02453417 = queryNorm
0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 5588, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=5588)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.14285715 = coord(2/14)
- Abstract
- To organize information, librarians create structures. These structures grow from a logic that goes back at least as far as Aristotle. It is the basis of classification as we practice it, and thesauri and subject headings have developed from it. Feminist critiques of logic suggest that logic is gendered in nature. This article will explore how these critiques play out in contemporary standards for the organization of information. Our widely used classification schemes embody principles such as hierarchical force that conform to traditional/Aristotelian logic. Our subject heading strings follow a linear path of subdivision. Our thesauri break down subjects into discrete concepts. In thesauri and subject heading lists we privilege hierarchical relationships, reflected in the syndetic structure of broader and narrower terms, over all other relationships. Are our classificatory and syndetic structures gendered? Are there other options? Carol Gilligan's In a Different Voice (1982), Women's Ways of Knowing (Belenky, Clinchy, Goldberger, & Tarule, 1986), and more recent related research suggest a different type of structure for women's knowledge grounded in "connected knowing." This article explores current and potential elements of connected knowing in subject access with a focus on the relationships, both paradigmatic and syntagmatic, between concepts.
- Content
- Beitrag in einem Themenheft 'Gender Issues in Information Needs and Services'.
- Date
- 11.12.2019 19:00:22
-
Hudon, M.: Preparing terminological definitions for indexing and retrieval thesauri : a model (1996)
0.00
0.0014173096 = product of:
0.019842334 = sum of:
0.019842334 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 5193) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.019842334 = score(doc=5193,freq=2.0), product of:
0.07421378 = queryWeight, product of:
3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
0.02453417 = queryNorm
0.26736724 = fieldWeight in 5193, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=5193)
0.071428575 = coord(1/14)
-
Dahlberg, I.: Concepts and terms : ISKO's major challenge (2009)
0.00
0.0013444485 = product of:
0.018822279 = sum of:
0.018822279 = weight(_text_:system in 3273) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.018822279 = score(doc=3273,freq=2.0), product of:
0.07727166 = queryWeight, product of:
3.1495528 = idf(docFreq=5152, maxDocs=44218)
0.02453417 = queryNorm
0.2435858 = fieldWeight in 3273, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.1495528 = idf(docFreq=5152, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=3273)
0.071428575 = coord(1/14)
- Abstract
- Starting from the premise that extant knowledge of the discipline of Knowledge Organization ought to be made accessible by its knowledge units (concepts) this article includes short descriptions of the work of E.Wuester (Austria) and F. Riggs (USA) who both had laid foundations in this field. A noematic concept of knowledge (Diemer 1962, 474) is used for the necessary work to be done. It is shown how a concept-theoretical approach (relying on the characteristics of concepts and their system-building capacity) can be applied for pertinent terminological work. Earlier work in this regard by standardization bodies is mentioned. Seven necessary steps towards accomplishment are outlined.
-
Bivins, K.T.: Concept formation : the evidence from experimental psychology and linguistics and its relationship to information science (1980)
0.00
0.0012401693 = product of:
0.01736237 = sum of:
0.01736237 = weight(_text_:information in 1319) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.01736237 = score(doc=1319,freq=6.0), product of:
0.04306919 = queryWeight, product of:
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.02453417 = queryNorm
0.40312737 = fieldWeight in 1319, product of:
2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
6.0 = termFreq=6.0
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=1319)
0.071428575 = coord(1/14)
- Source
- Theory and application of information research. Proc. of the 2nd Int. Research Forum on Information Science, 3.-6.8.1977, Copenhagen. Ed.: O. Harbo u. L. Kajberg
-
Thellefsen, M.M.; Thellefsen, T.; Sørensen, B.: Information as signs : a semiotic analysis of the information concept, determining its ontological and epistemological foundations (2018)
0.00
0.0012300805 = product of:
0.017221127 = sum of:
0.017221127 = weight(_text_:information in 4241) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.017221127 = score(doc=4241,freq=34.0), product of:
0.04306919 = queryWeight, product of:
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.02453417 = queryNorm
0.39984792 = fieldWeight in 4241, product of:
5.8309517 = tf(freq=34.0), with freq of:
34.0 = termFreq=34.0
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4241)
0.071428575 = coord(1/14)
- Abstract
- The purpose of this paper is to formulate an analytical framework for the information concept based on the semiotic theory. Design/methodology/approach The paper is motivated by the apparent controversy that still surrounds the information concept. Information, being a key concept within LIS, suffers from being anchored in various incompatible theories. The paper suggests that information is signs, and it demonstrates how the concept of information can be understood within C.S. Peirce's phenomenologically rooted semiotic. Hence, from there, certain ontological conditions as well epistemological consequences of the information concept can be deduced. Findings The paper argues that an understanding of information, as either objective or subjective/discursive, leads to either objective reductionism and signal processing, that fails to explain how information becomes meaningful at all, or conversely, information is understood only relative to subjective/discursive intentions, agendas, etc. To overcome the limitations of defining information as either objective or subjective/discursive, a semiotic analysis shows that information understood as signs is consistently sensitive to both objective and subjective/discursive features of information. It is consequently argued that information as concept should be defined in relation to ontological conditions having certain epistemological consequences. Originality/value The paper presents an analytical framework, derived from semiotics, that adds to the developments of the philosophical dimensions of information within LIS.
- Theme
- Information
-
Friedman, A.; Thellefsen, M.: Concept theory and semiotics in knowledge organization (2011)
0.00
0.0011523846 = product of:
0.016133383 = sum of:
0.016133383 = weight(_text_:system in 292) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.016133383 = score(doc=292,freq=2.0), product of:
0.07727166 = queryWeight, product of:
3.1495528 = idf(docFreq=5152, maxDocs=44218)
0.02453417 = queryNorm
0.20878783 = fieldWeight in 292, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.1495528 = idf(docFreq=5152, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=292)
0.071428575 = coord(1/14)
- Abstract
- Purpose - The purpose of this paper is to explore the basics of semiotic analysis and concept theory that represent two dominant approaches to knowledge representation, and explore how these approaches are fruitful for knowledge organization. Design/methodology/approach - In particular the semiotic theory formulated by the American philosopher C.S. Peirce and the concept theory formulated by Ingetraut Dahlberg are investigated. The paper compares the differences and similarities between these two theories of knowledge representation. Findings - The semiotic model is a general and unrestricted model of signs and Dahlberg's model is thought from the perspective and demand of better knowledge organization system (KOS) development. It is found that Dahlberg's concept model provides a detailed method for analyzing and representing concepts in a KOS, where semiotics provides the philosophical context for representation. Originality/value - This paper is the first to combine theories of knowledge representation, semiotic and concept theory, within the context of knowledge organization.
-
Bonnevie, E.: Dretske's semantic information theory and meta-theories in library and information science (2001)
0.00
0.0010756743 = product of:
0.015059439 = sum of:
0.015059439 = weight(_text_:information in 4484) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.015059439 = score(doc=4484,freq=26.0), product of:
0.04306919 = queryWeight, product of:
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.02453417 = queryNorm
0.34965688 = fieldWeight in 4484, product of:
5.0990195 = tf(freq=26.0), with freq of:
26.0 = termFreq=26.0
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4484)
0.071428575 = coord(1/14)
- Abstract
- This article presents the semantic information theory, formulated by the philosopher Fred I. Dretske, as a contribution to the discussion of metatheories and their practical implications in the field of library and information science. Dretske's theory is described in Knowledge and the flow of information. It is founded on mathematical communication theory but developed and elaborated into a cognitive, functionalistic theory, is individually oriented, and deals with the content of information. The topics are: the information process from perception to cognition, and how concept formation takes place in terms of digitisation. Other important issues are the concepts of information and knowledge, truth and meaning. Semantic information theory can be used as a frame of reference in order to explain, clarify and refute concepts currently used in library and information science, and as the basis for critical reviews of elements of the cognitive viewpoint in IR, primarily the notion of "potential information". The main contribution of the theory lies in a clarification of concepts, but there are still problems regarding the practical applications. More research is needed to combine philosophical discussions with the practice of information and library science.
- Theme
- Information
-
Sowa, J.F.: Ontology, metadata, and semiotics (2000)
0.00
9.603204E-4 = product of:
0.013444485 = sum of:
0.013444485 = weight(_text_:system in 5071) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.013444485 = score(doc=5071,freq=2.0), product of:
0.07727166 = queryWeight, product of:
3.1495528 = idf(docFreq=5152, maxDocs=44218)
0.02453417 = queryNorm
0.17398985 = fieldWeight in 5071, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.1495528 = idf(docFreq=5152, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=5071)
0.071428575 = coord(1/14)
- Abstract
- The Internet is a giant semiotic system. It is a massive collection of Peirce's three kinds of signs: icons, which show the form of something; indices, which point to something; and symbols, which represent something according to some convention. But current proposals for ontologies and metadata have overlooked some of the most important features of signs. A sign has three aspects: it is (1) an entity that represents (2) another entity to (3) an agent. By looking only at the signs themselves, some metadata proposals have lost sight of the entities they represent and the agents - human, animal, or robot - which interpret them. With its three branches of syntax, semantics, and pragmatics, semiotics provides guidelines for organizing and using signs to represent something to someone for some purpose. Besides representation, semiotics also supports methods for translating patterns of signs intended for one purpose to other patterns intended for different but related purposes. This article shows how the fundamental semiotic primitives are represented in semantically equivalent notations for logic, including controlled natural languages and various computer languages
-
Storms, G.; VanMechelen, I.; DeBoeck, P.: Structural-analysis of the intension and extension of semantic concepts (1994)
0.00
8.310104E-4 = product of:
0.011634145 = sum of:
0.011634145 = product of:
0.02326829 = sum of:
0.02326829 = weight(_text_:22 in 2574) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.02326829 = score(doc=2574,freq=2.0), product of:
0.085914485 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.02453417 = queryNorm
0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 2574, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=2574)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.071428575 = coord(1/14)
- Date
- 22. 7.2000 19:17:40
-
Dahlberg, I.: On the theory of the concept (1979)
0.00
7.160121E-4 = product of:
0.0100241685 = sum of:
0.0100241685 = weight(_text_:information in 1615) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.0100241685 = score(doc=1615,freq=2.0), product of:
0.04306919 = queryWeight, product of:
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.02453417 = queryNorm
0.23274569 = fieldWeight in 1615, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=1615)
0.071428575 = coord(1/14)
- Source
- Ordering systems for global information networks. Proc. of the 3rd Int. Study Conf. on Classification Research, Bombay 1975
-
Atran, S.: Basic conceptual domains (1989)
0.00
7.160121E-4 = product of:
0.0100241685 = sum of:
0.0100241685 = weight(_text_:information in 478) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.0100241685 = score(doc=478,freq=2.0), product of:
0.04306919 = queryWeight, product of:
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.02453417 = queryNorm
0.23274569 = fieldWeight in 478, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=478)
0.071428575 = coord(1/14)
- Theme
- Information
