Search (191 results, page 10 of 10)

4.32414E-4 = product of:
  0.0060537956 = sum of:
    0.0060537956 = weight(_text_:information in 6345) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0060537956 = score(doc=6345,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.052020688 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.029633347 = queryNorm
        0.116372846 = fieldWeight in 6345, 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=6345)
  0.071428575 = coord(1/14)

Abstract

Five years ago, we raised the question: is there a data model which is general enough such that all existing thesauri can be represented by a specialization of this general model without loss of information? The answer was not given at that time, but we referred to the principle of abstraction, well supported in object-oriented data modelling. We gained the empirical basis for that process of abstraction by modelling existing thesauri and a terminological dictionary; an abstracting view was afterwards presented in a paper to the TKE'93 conference. The present paper reports on a third step of abstraction with its very concrete consequences, embodies in a software called TerminologyFramework(TFw)

4.32414E-4 = product of:
  0.0060537956 = sum of:
    0.0060537956 = weight(_text_:information in 131) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0060537956 = score(doc=131,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.052020688 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.029633347 = queryNorm
        0.116372846 = fieldWeight in 131, 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=131)
  0.071428575 = coord(1/14)

Abstract

In this paper, after an introduction about problems of multilingual information languages, the rules and recommendations of the Guidelines for the establishment and development of multilingual thesauri for non-equivalence and partial equivalence of terms in different languages are discussed. Artificial terms are not very useful in searching, because most users are not willing to use a thesaurus to find the right descriptor. On the other hand indexers need guidance on how to index and therefore need a thesaurus with all desirable and necessary relations. It is suggested that bibliographic online systems can take over some of the functions for the searcher from the thesaurus and that a few new relations could be helpful to an indexer

4.32414E-4 = product of:
  0.0060537956 = sum of:
    0.0060537956 = weight(_text_:information in 2695) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0060537956 = score(doc=2695,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.052020688 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.029633347 = queryNorm
        0.116372846 = fieldWeight in 2695, 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=2695)
  0.071428575 = coord(1/14)

Abstract

In the UK, the aim to make public sector information much more available to the citizen has led to establishment of an "e-Govemment Interoperability Framework" based an a set of core standards. Among the standards is a controlled vocabulary, known as the Govemment Category List (GCL), used to select keywords for the metadata of all electronic resources originating from central or local govemment. The GCL is a small and simple taxonomy, designed to facilitate high-level browsing rather than deep searching. Specialized thesauri for particular subject areas may optionally complement the GCL. To ease the indexing burden, GCL terms will often be selected by direct mapping from the specialized vocabularies.

4.32414E-4 = product of:
  0.0060537956 = sum of:
    0.0060537956 = weight(_text_:information in 2732) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0060537956 = score(doc=2732,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.052020688 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.029633347 = queryNorm
        0.116372846 = fieldWeight in 2732, 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=2732)
  0.071428575 = coord(1/14)

Abstract

This paper evaluates and compares three thesaurus construction methodologies: literary scanning, word association tests, and involvement of subject expert groups. The evaluation concentrates an exploring advantages in relation to the sub-processes: collection, formation and structuring of concepts and terms. Quantitative as well as qualitative analyses have been carried out. The analysis Shows that the methods are complementary each providing distinct conceptual information from respectively a domain-oriented and a scientific viewpoint. The combination of methods provides a thesaurus, at the same time, mapping authoritative language and reflecting the diversity of language.

4.32414E-4 = product of:
  0.0060537956 = sum of:
    0.0060537956 = weight(_text_:information in 756) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0060537956 = score(doc=756,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.052020688 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.029633347 = queryNorm
        0.116372846 = fieldWeight in 756, 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=756)
  0.071428575 = coord(1/14)

Footnote

Preprint. To be published as Vol 122 in the Conferences in Research and Practice in Information Technology Series by the Australian Computer Society Inc. http://crpit.com/.

4.32414E-4 = product of:
  0.0060537956 = sum of:
    0.0060537956 = weight(_text_:information in 3533) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0060537956 = score(doc=3533,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.052020688 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.029633347 = queryNorm
        0.116372846 = fieldWeight in 3533, 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=3533)
  0.071428575 = coord(1/14)

Abstract

In industrialized countries, the rapidity of development has not taken into account the fact that it would be opportune to formalize "niche" knowledge. There is an ever-growing need for a written formalization of tacit knowledge. The aim of this activity consists in building specialized knowledge collections, which are useful to help and to guarantee the continuity of small and medium-sized business during successions, and to guarantee staff training related to specific practices. To reach this aim, this work presents the construction of a faceted thesaurus (GoldThes) for the domain of goldsmith handcraftsmanship, which tries to classify and organize a domain extracted from a regional context. The use of this kind of system demonstrated how classifying and organizing information into multi-dimensional hierarchies makes it more accessible than using a single taxonomy, that is a unique hierarchical dimension.

4.32414E-4 = product of:
  0.0060537956 = sum of:
    0.0060537956 = weight(_text_:information in 4641) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0060537956 = score(doc=4641,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.052020688 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.029633347 = queryNorm
        0.116372846 = fieldWeight in 4641, 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=4641)
  0.071428575 = coord(1/14)

Abstract

This paper presents an overview of the work in progress at the W3C to produce a standard conversion of WordNet to the RDF/OWL representation language in use in the SemanticWeb community. Such a standard representation is useful to provide application developers a high-quality resource and to promote interoperability. Important requirements in this conversion process are that it should be complete and should stay close to WordNet's conceptual model. The paper explains the steps taken to produce the conversion and details design decisions such as the composition of the class hierarchy and properties, the addition of suitable OWL semantics and the chosen format of the URIs. Additional topics include a strategy to incorporate OWL and RDFS semantics in one schema such that both RDF(S) infrastructure and OWL infrastructure can interpret the information correctly, problems encountered in understanding the Prolog source files and the description of the two versions that are provided (Basic and Full) to accommodate different usages of WordNet.

4.32414E-4 = product of:
  0.0060537956 = sum of:
    0.0060537956 = weight(_text_:information in 2826) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0060537956 = score(doc=2826,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.052020688 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.029633347 = queryNorm
        0.116372846 = fieldWeight in 2826, 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=2826)
  0.071428575 = coord(1/14)

Abstract

This paper is aimed at assessing the potential of interoperable knowledge organization systems to respond to search strategies in order to retrieve information from databases in the areas of health and biomedicine. An analysis was done on the semantic consistency of synonym grouping of a term selected from the Metathesaurus, the Unified Medical Language System of the National Library of Medicine, based on the characteristics of equivalence proposed in ISO 25964: 2: 2011 and based on the following categories: semantic, morphological, syntactic and typographical variations. This paper highlights the importance of understanding the results of automatic mapping as well as the need for characterization, evaluation and selection of equivalences for preparation of consistent search strategies and presentation of search results in scientific work methodologies.

3.6034497E-4 = product of:
  0.0050448296 = sum of:
    0.0050448296 = weight(_text_:information in 5226) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0050448296 = score(doc=5226,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.052020688 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.029633347 = queryNorm
        0.09697737 = fieldWeight in 5226, 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=5226)
  0.071428575 = coord(1/14)

Source

Journal of the American Society for Information Science and technology. 53(2002) no.13, S.1130-1138

2.8827597E-4 = product of:
  0.0040358636 = sum of:
    0.0040358636 = weight(_text_:information in 549) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0040358636 = score(doc=549,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.052020688 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.029633347 = queryNorm
        0.0775819 = fieldWeight in 549, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=549)
  0.071428575 = coord(1/14)

Abstract

LCSH is known as such since 1975. It always has created headings to serve the LC collections instead of a theoretical basis. It started to replace cross reference codes by thesaural codes in 1986, in a mechanical fashion. It was in no way transformed into a thesaurus. Its encyclopedic coverage, its pre-coordinate concepts make it substantially distinct, considering that thesauri usually map a restricted field of knowledge and use uniterms. The questions raised are whether the new symbols comply with thesaurus standards and if they are true to one or to several models. Explanations and definitions from other lists of subject headings and thesauri, literature in the field of classification and subject indexing will provide some answers. For instance, see refers from a subject heading not used to another or others used. Exceptionally it will lead from a specific term to a more general one. Some equate a see reference with the equivalence relationship. Such relationships are pointed by USE in LCSH. See also references are made from the broader subject to narrower parts of it and also between associated subjects. They suggest lateral or vertical connexions as well as reciprocal relationships. They serve a coordination purpose for some, lay down a methodical search itinerary for others. Since their inception in the 1950's thesauri have been devised for indexing and retrieving information in the fields of science and technology. Eventually they attended to a number of social sciences and humanities. Research derived from thesauri was voluminous. Numerous guidelines are designed. They did not discriminate between the "hard" sciences and the social sciences. RT relationships are widely but diversely used in numerous controlled vocabularies. LCSH's aim is to achieve a list almost free of RT and SA references. It thus restricts relationships to BT/NT, USE and UF. This raises the question as to whether all fields of knowledge can "fit" in the Procrustean bed of RT/NT, i.e., genus/species relationships. Standard codes were devised. It was soon realized that BT/NT, well suited to the genus/species couple could not signal a whole-part relationship. In LCSH, BT and NT function as reciprocals, the whole-part relationship is taken into account by ISO. It is amply elaborated upon by authors. The part-whole connexion is sometimes studied apart. The decision to replace cross reference codes was an improvement. Relations can now be distinguished through the distinct needs of numerous fields of knowledge are not attended to. Topic inclusion, and topic-subtopic, could provide the missing link where genus/species or whole/part are inadequate. Distinct codes, BT/NT and whole/part, should be provided. Sorting relationships with mechanical means can only lead to confusion.

2.8827597E-4 = product of:
  0.0040358636 = sum of:
    0.0040358636 = weight(_text_:information in 1016) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0040358636 = score(doc=1016,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.052020688 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.029633347 = queryNorm
        0.0775819 = fieldWeight in 1016, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=1016)
  0.071428575 = coord(1/14)

Source

Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 64(2013) no.7, S.1330-1344