Search (6 results, page 1 of 1)

  • × language_ss:"e"
  • × theme_ss:"Semantische Interoperabilität"
  • × theme_ss:"Wissensrepräsentation"
  1. Bandholtz, T.; Schulte-Coerne, T.; Glaser, R.; Fock, J.; Keller, T.: iQvoc - open source SKOS(XL) maintenance and publishing tool (2010) 0.01
    0.014926414 = product of:
      0.059705656 = sum of:
        0.059705656 = weight(_text_:reference in 604) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.059705656 = score(doc=604,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.18975449 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.0683694 = idf(docFreq=2055, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04664141 = queryNorm
            0.31464687 = fieldWeight in 604, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              4.0683694 = idf(docFreq=2055, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=604)
      0.25 = coord(1/4)
    
    Abstract
    iQvoc is a new open source SKOS-XL vocabulary management tool developed by the Federal Environment Agency, Germany, and innoQ Deutschland GmbH. Its immediate purpose is maintaining and publishing reference vocabularies in the upcoming Linked Data cloud of environmental information, but it may be easily adapted to host any SKOS- XL compliant vocabulary. iQvoc is implemented as a Ruby on Rails application running on top of JRuby - the Java implementation of the Ruby Programming Language. To increase the user experience when editing content, iQvoc uses heavily the JavaScript library jQuery.
  2. Hollink, L.; Assem, M. van; Wang, S.; Isaac, A.; Schreiber, G.: Two variations on ontology alignment evaluation : methodological issues (2008) 0.01
    0.012794068 = product of:
      0.051176272 = sum of:
        0.051176272 = weight(_text_:reference in 4645) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.051176272 = score(doc=4645,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.18975449 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.0683694 = idf(docFreq=2055, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04664141 = queryNorm
            0.2696973 = fieldWeight in 4645, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              4.0683694 = idf(docFreq=2055, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4645)
      0.25 = coord(1/4)
    
    Abstract
    Evaluation of ontology alignments is in practice done in two ways: (1) assessing individual correspondences and (2) comparing the alignment to a reference alignment. However, this type of evaluation does not guarantee that an application which uses the alignment will perform well. In this paper, we contribute to the current ontology alignment evaluation practices by proposing two alternative evaluation methods that take into account some characteristics of a usage scenario without doing a full-fledged end-to-end evaluation. We compare different evaluation approaches in three case studies, focussing on methodological issues. Each case study considers an alignment between a different pair of ontologies, ranging from rich and well-structured to small and poorly structured. This enables us to conclude on the use of different evaluation approaches in different settings.
  3. Vlachidis, A.; Tudhope, D.: ¬A knowledge-based approach to information extraction for semantic interoperability in the archaeology domain (2016) 0.01
    0.010661725 = product of:
      0.0426469 = sum of:
        0.0426469 = weight(_text_:reference in 2895) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.0426469 = score(doc=2895,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.18975449 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.0683694 = idf(docFreq=2055, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04664141 = queryNorm
            0.22474778 = fieldWeight in 2895, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              4.0683694 = idf(docFreq=2055, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2895)
      0.25 = coord(1/4)
    
    Abstract
    The article presents a method for automatic semantic indexing of archaeological grey-literature reports using empirical (rule-based) Information Extraction techniques in combination with domain-specific knowledge organization systems. The semantic annotation system (OPTIMA) performs the tasks of Named Entity Recognition, Relation Extraction, Negation Detection, and Word-Sense Disambiguation using hand-crafted rules and terminological resources for associating contextual abstractions with classes of the standard ontology CIDOC Conceptual Reference Model (CRM) for cultural heritage and its archaeological extension, CRM-EH. Relation Extraction (RE) performance benefits from a syntactic-based definition of RE patterns derived from domain oriented corpus analysis. The evaluation also shows clear benefit in the use of assistive natural language processing (NLP) modules relating to Word-Sense Disambiguation, Negation Detection, and Noun Phrase Validation, together with controlled thesaurus expansion. The semantic indexing results demonstrate the capacity of rule-based Information Extraction techniques to deliver interoperable semantic abstractions (semantic annotations) with respect to the CIDOC CRM and archaeological thesauri. Major contributions include recognition of relevant entities using shallow parsing NLP techniques driven by a complimentary use of ontological and terminological domain resources and empirical derivation of context-driven RE rules for the recognition of semantic relationships from phrases of unstructured text.
  4. Burstein, M.; McDermott, D.V.: Ontology translation for interoperability among Semantic Web services (2005) 0.01
    0.009707294 = product of:
      0.038829178 = sum of:
        0.038829178 = product of:
          0.077658355 = sum of:
            0.077658355 = weight(_text_:services in 2661) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.077658355 = score(doc=2661,freq=10.0), product of:
                0.1712379 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.6713707 = idf(docFreq=3057, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.04664141 = queryNorm
                0.45351148 = fieldWeight in 2661, product of:
                  3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
                    10.0 = termFreq=10.0
                  3.6713707 = idf(docFreq=3057, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2661)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.25 = coord(1/4)
    
    Abstract
    Research on semantic web services promises greater interoperability among software agents and web services by enabling content-based automated service discovery and interaction and by utilizing. Although this is to be based on use of shared ontologies published on the semantic web, services produced and described by different developers may well use different, perhaps partly overlapping, sets of ontologies. Interoperability will depend on ontology mappings and architectures supporting the associated translation processes. The question we ask is, does the traditional approach of introducing mediator agents to translate messages between requestors and services work in such an open environment? This article reviews some of the processing assumptions that were made in the development of the semantic web service modeling ontology OWL-S and argues that, as a practical matter, the translation function cannot always be isolated in mediators. Ontology mappings need to be published on the semantic web just as ontologies themselves are. The translation for service discovery, service process model interpretation, task negotiation, service invocation, and response interpretation may then be distributed to various places in the architecture so that translation can be done in the specific goal-oriented informational contexts of the agents performing these processes. We present arguments for assigning translation responsibility to particular agents in the cases of service invocation, response translation, and match- making.
  5. Bittner, T.; Donnelly, M.; Winter, S.: Ontology and semantic interoperability (2006) 0.00
    0.0047394503 = product of:
      0.018957801 = sum of:
        0.018957801 = product of:
          0.037915602 = sum of:
            0.037915602 = weight(_text_:22 in 4820) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.037915602 = score(doc=4820,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.16333027 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.04664141 = queryNorm
                0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 4820, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4820)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.25 = coord(1/4)
    
    Date
    3.12.2016 18:39:22
  6. Dobrev, P.; Kalaydjiev, O.; Angelova, G.: From conceptual structures to semantic interoperability of content (2007) 0.00
    0.003949542 = product of:
      0.015798168 = sum of:
        0.015798168 = product of:
          0.031596337 = sum of:
            0.031596337 = weight(_text_:22 in 4607) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.031596337 = score(doc=4607,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.16333027 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.04664141 = queryNorm
                0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 4607, 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=4607)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.25 = coord(1/4)
    
    Source
    Conceptual structures: knowledge architectures for smart applications: 15th International Conference on Conceptual Structures, ICCS 2007, Sheffield, UK, July 22 - 27, 2007 ; proceedings. Eds.: U. Priss u.a