Search (224 results, page 2 of 12)

  • × language_ss:"e"
  • × theme_ss:"Semantische Interoperabilität"
  1. Nicholson, D.: High-Level Thesaurus (HILT) project : interoperability and cross-searching distributed services (200?) 0.00 
    0.0014503849 = product of:
  0.013053464 = sum of:
    0.0050667557 = weight(_text_:in in 5966) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0050667557 = score(doc=5966,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.029798867 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.021906832 = queryNorm
        0.17003182 = fieldWeight in 5966, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=5966)
    0.007986708 = product of:
      0.023960123 = sum of:
        0.023960123 = weight(_text_:29 in 5966) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.023960123 = score(doc=5966,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.077061385 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
              0.021906832 = queryNorm
            0.31092256 = fieldWeight in 5966, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=5966)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.11111111 = coord(2/18)
    Abstract
    My presentation is about the HILT, High Level Thesaurus Project, which is looking, very roughly speaking, at how we might deal with interoperability problems relating to cross-searching distributed services by subject. The aims of HILT are to study and report on the problem of cross-searching and browsing by subject across a range of communities, services, and service or resource types in the UK given the wide range of subject schemes and associated practices in place
    Date
    13. 4.2008 12:29:16
  2. Arave, G.; Jacob, E.K.: Evaluating semantic interoperability across ontologies (2016) 0.00 
    0.0014503849 = product of:
  0.013053464 = sum of:
    0.0050667557 = weight(_text_:in in 4924) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0050667557 = score(doc=4924,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.029798867 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.021906832 = queryNorm
        0.17003182 = fieldWeight in 4924, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=4924)
    0.007986708 = product of:
      0.023960123 = sum of:
        0.023960123 = weight(_text_:29 in 4924) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.023960123 = score(doc=4924,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.077061385 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
              0.021906832 = queryNorm
            0.31092256 = fieldWeight in 4924, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=4924)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.11111111 = coord(2/18)
    Series
    Advances in knowledge organization; vol.15
    Source
    Knowledge organization for a sustainable world: challenges and perspectives for cultural, scientific, and technological sharing in a connected society : proceedings of the Fourteenth International ISKO Conference 27-29 September 2016, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil / organized by International Society for Knowledge Organization (ISKO), ISKO-Brazil, São Paulo State University ; edited by José Augusto Chaves Guimarães, Suellen Oliveira Milani, Vera Dodebei
  3. Tonkin, E.; Baptista, A.A.; Hooland, S. van; Resmini, A.; Mendéz, E.; Neville, L.: Kinds of Tags : a collaborative research study on tag usage and structure (2007) 0.00 
    0.001431926 = product of:
  0.012887334 = sum of:
    0.004433411 = weight(_text_:in in 531) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.004433411 = score(doc=531,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.029798867 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.021906832 = queryNorm
        0.14877784 = fieldWeight in 531, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=531)
    0.008453923 = weight(_text_:der in 531) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.008453923 = score(doc=531,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.048934754 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.2337668 = idf(docFreq=12875, maxDocs=44218)
          0.021906832 = queryNorm
        0.17275909 = fieldWeight in 531, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          2.2337668 = idf(docFreq=12875, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=531)
  0.11111111 = coord(2/18)
    Abstract
    KoT (Kinds of Tags) is an ongoing joint collaborative research effort with many participants worldwide, including the University of Minho, UKOLN, the University of Bologna, the Université Libre de Bruxelles and La Universidad Carlos III de Madrid. It is focused on the analysis of tags that are in common use in the practice of social tagging, with the aim of discovering how easily tags can be 'normalised' for interoperability with standard metadata environments such as the DC Metadata Terms.
    Content
    Präsentation während der Veranstaltung "Networked Knowledge Organization Systems and Services: The 6th European Networked Knowledge Organization Systems (NKOS) Workshop, Workshop at the 11th ECDL Conference, Budapest, Hungary, September 21st 2007".
  4. Dextre Clarke, S.G.: Overview of ISO NP 25964 : structured vocabularies for information retrieval (2007) 0.00 
    0.0014022585 = product of:
  0.012620326 = sum of:
    0.0053741056 = weight(_text_:in in 535) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0053741056 = score(doc=535,freq=8.0), product of:
        0.029798867 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.021906832 = queryNorm
        0.18034597 = fieldWeight in 535, product of:
          2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
            8.0 = termFreq=8.0
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=535)
    0.00724622 = weight(_text_:der in 535) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.00724622 = score(doc=535,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.048934754 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.2337668 = idf(docFreq=12875, maxDocs=44218)
          0.021906832 = queryNorm
        0.14807922 = fieldWeight in 535, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          2.2337668 = idf(docFreq=12875, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=535)
  0.11111111 = coord(2/18)
    Abstract
    ISO 2788 and ISO 5964, the international standards for monolingual and multilingual thesauri respectively dated 1986 and 1985, are very much in need of revision. A proposal to revise them was recently approved by the relevant subcommittee, ISO TC46/SC9. The work will be based on BS 8723, a five part standard of which Parts 1 and 2 were published in 2005, Parts 3 and 4 are scheduled for publication in 2007, and Part 5 is still in draft. This subsession will address aspects of the whole revision project. It is conceived as a panel session starting with a brief overview from the project leader. Then there are three presentations of 15 minutes, plus 5 minutes each for specific questions. At the end we have 20 minutes for questions to any or all of the panel, and discussion of issues from the workshop participants.
    Content
    Präsentation während der Veranstaltung "Networked Knowledge Organization Systems and Services: The 6th European Networked Knowledge Organization Systems (NKOS) Workshop, Workshop at the 11th ECDL Conference, Budapest, Hungary, September 21st 2007".
  5. Wang, S.; Isaac, A.; Schopman, B.; Schlobach, S.; Meij, L. van der: Matching multilingual subject vocabularies (2009) 0.00 
    0.0014022585 = product of:
  0.012620326 = sum of:
    0.0053741056 = weight(_text_:in in 3035) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0053741056 = score(doc=3035,freq=8.0), product of:
        0.029798867 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.021906832 = queryNorm
        0.18034597 = fieldWeight in 3035, product of:
          2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
            8.0 = termFreq=8.0
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=3035)
    0.00724622 = weight(_text_:der in 3035) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.00724622 = score(doc=3035,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.048934754 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.2337668 = idf(docFreq=12875, maxDocs=44218)
          0.021906832 = queryNorm
        0.14807922 = fieldWeight in 3035, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          2.2337668 = idf(docFreq=12875, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=3035)
  0.11111111 = coord(2/18)
    Abstract
    Most libraries and other cultural heritage institutions use controlled knowledge organisation systems, such as thesauri, to describe their collections. Unfortunately, as most of these institutions use different such systems, united access to heterogeneous collections is difficult. Things are even worse in an international context when concepts have labels in different languages. In order to overcome the multilingual interoperability problem between European Libraries, extensive work has been done to manually map concepts from different knowledge organisation systems, which is a tedious and expensive process. Within the TELplus project, we developed and evaluated methods to automatically discover these mappings, using different ontology matching techniques. In experiments on major French, English and German subject heading lists Rameau, LCSH and SWD, we show that we can automatically produce mappings of surprisingly good quality, even when using relatively naive translation and matching methods.
  6. Levergood, B.; Farrenkopf, S.; Frasnelli, E.: ¬The specification of the language of the field and interoperability : cross-language access to catalogues and online libraries (CACAO) (2008) 0.00 
    0.0013908951 = product of:
  0.012518056 = sum of:
    0.0065819086 = weight(_text_:in in 2646) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0065819086 = score(doc=2646,freq=12.0), product of:
        0.029798867 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.021906832 = queryNorm
        0.22087781 = fieldWeight in 2646, product of:
          3.4641016 = tf(freq=12.0), with freq of:
            12.0 = termFreq=12.0
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2646)
    0.0059361467 = product of:
      0.01780844 = sum of:
        0.01780844 = weight(_text_:22 in 2646) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.01780844 = score(doc=2646,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.076713994 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.021906832 = queryNorm
            0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 2646, 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=2646)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.11111111 = coord(2/18)
    Abstract
    The CACAO Project (Cross-language Access to Catalogues and Online Libraries) has been designed to implement natural language processing and cross-language information retrieval techniques to provide cross-language access to information in libraries, a critical issue in the linguistically diverse European Union. This project report addresses two metadata-related challenges for the library community in this context: "false friends" (identical words having different meanings in different languages) and term ambiguity. The possible solutions involve enriching the metadata with attributes specifying language or the source authority file, or associating potential search terms to classes in a classification system. The European Library will evaluate an early implementation of this work in late 2008.
    Source
    Metadata for semantic and social applications : proceedings of the International Conference on Dublin Core and Metadata Applications, Berlin, 22 - 26 September 2008, DC 2008: Berlin, Germany / ed. by Jane Greenberg and Wolfgang Klas
  7. Hider, P.; Coe, M.: Academic disciplines in the context of library classification : mapping university faculty structures to the DDC and LCC schemes (2022) 0.00 
    0.0013797963 = product of:
  0.012418167 = sum of:
    0.005429798 = weight(_text_:in in 709) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.005429798 = score(doc=709,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.029798867 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.021906832 = queryNorm
        0.1822149 = fieldWeight in 709, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=709)
    0.006988369 = product of:
      0.020965107 = sum of:
        0.020965107 = weight(_text_:29 in 709) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.020965107 = score(doc=709,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.077061385 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
              0.021906832 = queryNorm
            0.27205724 = fieldWeight in 709, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=709)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.11111111 = coord(2/18)
    Abstract
    We investigated the extent to which the Dewey Decimal Classification (DDC) and the Library of Congress Classification reflect the organizational structures of Australian universities. The mapping of the faculty structures of ten universities to the two schemes showed strong alignment, with very few fields represented in the names of the organizational units not covered at all by either bibliographic scheme. This suggests a degree of universality and "scientific and educational consensus" with respect to both the schemes and academic disciplines. The article goes on to discuss the concept of discipline and its application in bibliographic classification.
    Date
    29. 9.2022 17:15:48
  8. Mayr, P.; Petras, V.: Building a Terminology Network for Search : the KoMoHe project (2008) 0.00 
    0.0013728114 = product of:
  0.012355302 = sum of:
    0.005429798 = weight(_text_:in in 2618) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.005429798 = score(doc=2618,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.029798867 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.021906832 = queryNorm
        0.1822149 = fieldWeight in 2618, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=2618)
    0.0069255047 = product of:
      0.020776514 = sum of:
        0.020776514 = weight(_text_:22 in 2618) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.020776514 = score(doc=2618,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.076713994 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.021906832 = queryNorm
            0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 2618, 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=2618)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.11111111 = coord(2/18)
    Abstract
    The paper reports about results on the GESIS-IZ project "Competence Center Modeling and Treatment of Semantic Heterogeneity" (KoMoHe). KoMoHe supervised a terminology mapping effort, in which 'cross-concordances' between major controlled vocabularies were organized, created and managed. In this paper we describe the establishment and implementation of crossconcordances for search in a digital library (DL).
    Source
    Metadata for semantic and social applications : proceedings of the International Conference on Dublin Core and Metadata Applications, Berlin, 22 - 26 September 2008, DC 2008: Berlin, Germany / ed. by Jane Greenberg and Wolfgang Klas
  9. Hollink, L.; Assem, M. van; Wang, S.; Isaac, A.; Schreiber, G.: Two variations on ontology alignment evaluation : methodological issues (2008) 0.00 
    0.0013331628 = product of:
  0.011998464 = sum of:
    0.006008433 = weight(_text_:in in 4645) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.006008433 = score(doc=4645,freq=10.0), product of:
        0.029798867 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.021906832 = queryNorm
        0.20163295 = fieldWeight in 4645, product of:
          3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
            10.0 = termFreq=10.0
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4645)
    0.005990031 = product of:
      0.017970093 = sum of:
        0.017970093 = weight(_text_:29 in 4645) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.017970093 = score(doc=4645,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.077061385 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
              0.021906832 = queryNorm
            0.23319192 = fieldWeight in 4645, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4645)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.11111111 = coord(2/18)
    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.
    Date
    29. 7.2011 14:44:56
  10. Naudet, Y.; Latour, T.; Chen, D.: ¬A Systemic approach to Interoperability formalization (2009) 0.00 
    0.0013331628 = product of:
  0.011998464 = sum of:
    0.006008433 = weight(_text_:in in 2740) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.006008433 = score(doc=2740,freq=10.0), product of:
        0.029798867 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.021906832 = queryNorm
        0.20163295 = fieldWeight in 2740, product of:
          3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
            10.0 = termFreq=10.0
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2740)
    0.005990031 = product of:
      0.017970093 = sum of:
        0.017970093 = weight(_text_:29 in 2740) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.017970093 = score(doc=2740,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.077061385 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
              0.021906832 = queryNorm
            0.23319192 = fieldWeight in 2740, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2740)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.11111111 = coord(2/18)
    Abstract
    With a first version developed last year, the Ontology of Interoperability (OoI) aims at formally describing concepts relating to problems and solutions in the domain of interoperability. From the beginning, the OoI has its foundations in the systemic theory and addresses interoperability from the general point of view of a system, whether it is composed by other systems (systems-of-systems) or not. In this paper, we present the last OoI focusing on the systemic approach. We then integrate a classification of interoperability knowledge provided by the Framework for Enterprise Interoperability. This way, we contextualize the OoI with a specific vocabulary to the enterprise domain, where solutions to interoperability problems are characterized according to interoperability approaches defined in the ISO 14258 and both solutions and problems can be localized into enterprises levels and characterized by interoperability levels, as defined in the European Interoperability Framework.
    Date
    29. 1.2016 18:48:14
  11. Bittner, T.; Donnelly, M.; Winter, S.: Ontology and semantic interoperability (2006) 0.00 
    0.0013271755 = product of:
  0.01194458 = sum of:
    0.006008433 = weight(_text_:in in 4820) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.006008433 = score(doc=4820,freq=10.0), product of:
        0.029798867 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.021906832 = queryNorm
        0.20163295 = fieldWeight in 4820, product of:
          3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
            10.0 = termFreq=10.0
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4820)
    0.0059361467 = product of:
      0.01780844 = sum of:
        0.01780844 = weight(_text_:22 in 4820) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.01780844 = score(doc=4820,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.076713994 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.021906832 = 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)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.11111111 = coord(2/18)
    Abstract
    One of the major problems facing systems for Computer Aided Design (CAD), Architecture Engineering and Construction (AEC) and Geographic Information Systems (GIS) applications today is the lack of interoperability among the various systems. When integrating software applications, substantial di culties can arise in translating information from one application to the other. In this paper, we focus on semantic di culties that arise in software integration. Applications may use di erent terminologies to describe the same domain. Even when appli-cations use the same terminology, they often associate di erent semantics with the terms. This obstructs information exchange among applications. To cir-cumvent this obstacle, we need some way of explicitly specifying the semantics for each terminology in an unambiguous fashion. Ontologies can provide such specification. It will be the task of this paper to explain what ontologies are and how they can be used to facilitate interoperability between software systems used in computer aided design, architecture engineering and construction, and geographic information processing.
    Date
    3.12.2016 18:39:22
  12. Ahn, J.-w.; Soergel, D.; Lin, X.; Zhang, M.: Mapping between ARTstor terms and the Getty Art and Architecture Thesaurus (2014) 0.00 
    0.0013271755 = product of:
  0.01194458 = sum of:
    0.006008433 = weight(_text_:in in 1421) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.006008433 = score(doc=1421,freq=10.0), product of:
        0.029798867 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.021906832 = queryNorm
        0.20163295 = fieldWeight in 1421, product of:
          3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
            10.0 = termFreq=10.0
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1421)
    0.0059361467 = product of:
      0.01780844 = sum of:
        0.01780844 = weight(_text_:22 in 1421) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.01780844 = score(doc=1421,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.076713994 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.021906832 = queryNorm
            0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 1421, 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=1421)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.11111111 = coord(2/18)
    Abstract
    To make better use of knowledge organization systems (KOS) for query expansion, we have developed a pattern-based technique for composition ontology mapping in a specific domain. The technique was tested in a two-step mapping. The user's free-text queries were first mapped to Getty's Art & Architecture Thesaurus (AAT) terms. The AAT-based queries were then mapped to a search engine's indexing vocabulary (ARTstor terms). The result indicated that our technique has improved the mapping success rate from 40% to 70%. We discuss also how the technique may be applied to other KOS mapping and how it may be implemented in practical systems.
    Series
    Advances in knowledge organization; vol. 14
    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
  13. Stamou, G.; Chortaras, A.: Ontological query answering over semantic data (2017) 0.00 
    0.0012854938 = product of:
  0.011569444 = sum of:
    0.003582737 = weight(_text_:in in 3926) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.003582737 = score(doc=3926,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.029798867 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.021906832 = queryNorm
        0.120230645 = fieldWeight in 3926, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=3926)
    0.007986708 = product of:
      0.023960123 = sum of:
        0.023960123 = weight(_text_:29 in 3926) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.023960123 = score(doc=3926,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.077061385 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
              0.021906832 = queryNorm
            0.31092256 = fieldWeight in 3926, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=3926)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.11111111 = coord(2/18)
    Pages
    S.29-63
    Series
    Lecture Notes in Computer Scienc;10370) (Information Systems and Applications, incl. Internet/Web, and HCI
  14. Wang, S.; Isaac, A.; Schlobach, S.; Meij, L. van der; Schopman, B.: Instance-based semantic interoperability in the cultural heritage (2012) 0.00 
    0.0012803823 = product of:
  0.0115234405 = sum of:
    0.0054849237 = weight(_text_:in in 125) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0054849237 = score(doc=125,freq=12.0), product of:
        0.029798867 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.021906832 = queryNorm
        0.18406484 = fieldWeight in 125, product of:
          3.4641016 = tf(freq=12.0), with freq of:
            12.0 = termFreq=12.0
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=125)
    0.0060385168 = weight(_text_:der in 125) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0060385168 = score(doc=125,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.048934754 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.2337668 = idf(docFreq=12875, maxDocs=44218)
          0.021906832 = queryNorm
        0.12339935 = fieldWeight in 125, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          2.2337668 = idf(docFreq=12875, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=125)
  0.11111111 = coord(2/18)
    Abstract
    This paper gives a comprehensive overview over the problem of Semantic Interoperability in the Cultural Heritage domain, with a particular focus on solutions centered around extensional, i.e., instance-based, ontology matching methods. It presents three typical scenarios requiring interoperability, one with homogenous collections, one with heterogeneous collections, and one with multi-lingual collection. It discusses two different ways to evaluate potential alignments, one based on the application of re-indexing, one using a reference alignment. To these scenarios we apply extensional matching with different similarity measures which gives interesting insights. Finally, we firmly position our work in the Cultural Heritage context through an extensive discussion of the relevance for, and issues related to this specific field. The findings are as unspectacular as expected but nevertheless important: the provided methods can really improve interoperability in a number of important cases, but they are not universal solutions to all related problems. This paper will provide a solid foundation for any future work on Semantic Interoperability in the Cultural Heritage domain, in particular for anybody intending to apply extensional methods.
  15. Amarger, F.; Chanet, J.-P.; Haemmerlé, O.; Hernandez, N.; Roussey, C.: SKOS sources transformations for ontology engineering : agronomical taxonomy use case (2014) 0.00 
    0.0012626819 = product of:
  0.011364137 = sum of:
    0.0053741056 = weight(_text_:in in 1593) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0053741056 = score(doc=1593,freq=8.0), product of:
        0.029798867 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.021906832 = queryNorm
        0.18034597 = fieldWeight in 1593, product of:
          2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
            8.0 = termFreq=8.0
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1593)
    0.005990031 = product of:
      0.017970093 = sum of:
        0.017970093 = weight(_text_:29 in 1593) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.017970093 = score(doc=1593,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.077061385 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
              0.021906832 = queryNorm
            0.23319192 = fieldWeight in 1593, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1593)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.11111111 = coord(2/18)
    Abstract
    Sources like thesauri or taxonomies are already used as input in ontology development process. Some of them are also published on the LOD using the SKOS format. Reusing this type of sources to build an ontology is not an easy task. The ontology developer has to face different syntax and different modelling goals. We propose in this paper a new methodology to transform several non-ontological sources into a single ontology. We take into account: the redundancy of the knowledge extracted from sources in order to discover the consensual knowledge and Ontology Design Patterns (ODPs) to guide the transformation process. We have evaluated our methodology by creating an ontology on wheat taxonomy from three sources: Agrovoc thesaurus, TaxRef taxonomy, NCBI taxonomy.
    Series
    Communications in computer and information science; 478
    Source
    Metadata and semantics research: 8th Research Conference, MTSR 2014, Karlsruhe, Germany, November 27-29, 2014, Proceedings. Eds.: S. Closs et al
  16. Bellotto, A.; Bekesi, J.: Enriching metadata for a university repository by modelling and infrastructure : a new vocabulary server for Phaidra (2019) 0.00 
    0.0012273652 = product of:
  0.011046287 = sum of:
    0.003800067 = weight(_text_:in in 5693) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.003800067 = score(doc=5693,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.029798867 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.021906832 = queryNorm
        0.12752387 = fieldWeight in 5693, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=5693)
    0.00724622 = weight(_text_:der in 5693) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.00724622 = score(doc=5693,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.048934754 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.2337668 = idf(docFreq=12875, maxDocs=44218)
          0.021906832 = queryNorm
        0.14807922 = fieldWeight in 5693, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          2.2337668 = idf(docFreq=12875, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=5693)
  0.11111111 = coord(2/18)
    Abstract
    This paper illustrates an initial step towards the 'semantic enrichment' of University of Vienna's Phaidra repository as one of the valuable and up-to-date strategies able to enhance its role and usage. Firstly, a technical report points out the choice made in a local context, i.e. the deployment of the vocabulary server iQvoc instead of the formerly used SKOSMOS, explaining design decisions behind the current tool and additional features that the implementation required. Afterwards, some modelling characteristics of the local LOD controlled vocabulary are described according to SKOS documentation and best practices, highlighting which approaches can be pursued for rendering a LOD KOS available in the Web as well as issues that can be possibly encountered.
    Source
    Mitteilungen der Vereinigung Österreichischer Bibliothekarinnen und Bibliothekare. 72(2019) H.2-4, S.446-459
  17. Mayr, P.; Petras, V.: Cross-concordances : terminology mapping and its effectiveness for information retrieval (2008) 0.00 
    0.0011826826 = product of:
  0.010644143 = sum of:
    0.0046541123 = weight(_text_:in in 2323) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0046541123 = score(doc=2323,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.029798867 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.021906832 = queryNorm
        0.1561842 = fieldWeight in 2323, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2323)
    0.005990031 = product of:
      0.017970093 = sum of:
        0.017970093 = weight(_text_:29 in 2323) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.017970093 = score(doc=2323,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.077061385 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
              0.021906832 = queryNorm
            0.23319192 = fieldWeight in 2323, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2323)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.11111111 = coord(2/18)
    Abstract
    The German Federal Ministry for Education and Research funded a major terminology mapping initiative, which found its conclusion in 2007. The task of this terminology mapping initiative was to organize, create and manage 'cross-concordances' between controlled vocabularies (thesauri, classification systems, subject heading lists) centred around the social sciences but quickly extending to other subject areas. 64 crosswalks with more than 500,000 relations were established. In the final phase of the project, a major evaluation effort to test and measure the effectiveness of the vocabulary mappings in an information system environment was conducted. The paper reports on the cross-concordance work and evaluation results.
    Date
    26.12.2011 13:33:29
  18. Khiat, A.; Benaissa, M.: Approach for instance-based ontology alignment : using argument and event structures of generative lexicon (2014) 0.00 
    0.0011826826 = product of:
  0.010644143 = sum of:
    0.0046541123 = weight(_text_:in in 1577) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0046541123 = score(doc=1577,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.029798867 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.021906832 = queryNorm
        0.1561842 = fieldWeight in 1577, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1577)
    0.005990031 = product of:
      0.017970093 = sum of:
        0.017970093 = weight(_text_:29 in 1577) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.017970093 = score(doc=1577,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.077061385 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
              0.021906832 = queryNorm
            0.23319192 = fieldWeight in 1577, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1577)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.11111111 = coord(2/18)
    Abstract
    Ontology alignment became a very important problem to ensure semantic interoperability for different sources of information heterogeneous and distributed. Instance-based ontology alignment represents a very promising technique to find semantic correspondences between entities of different ontologies when they contain a lot of instances. In this paper, we describe a new approach to manage ontologies that do not share common instances.This approach extracts the argument and event structures from a set of instances of the concept of the source ontology and compared them with other semantic features extracted from a set of instances of the concept of the target ontology using Generative Lexicon Theory. We show that it is theoretically powerful because it is based on linguistic semantics and useful in practice. We present the experimental results obtained by running our approach on Biblio test of Benchmark series of OAEI 2011. The results show the good performance of our approach.
    Series
    Communications in computer and information science; 478
    Source
    Metadata and semantics research: 8th Research Conference, MTSR 2014, Karlsruhe, Germany, November 27-29, 2014, Proceedings. Eds.: S. Closs et al
  19. Golub, K.; Tudhope, D.; Zeng, M.L.; Zumer, M.: Terminology registries for knowledge organization systems : functionality, use, and attributes (2014) 0.00 
    0.0011766955 = product of:
  0.010590259 = sum of:
    0.0046541123 = weight(_text_:in in 1347) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0046541123 = score(doc=1347,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.029798867 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.021906832 = queryNorm
        0.1561842 = fieldWeight in 1347, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1347)
    0.0059361467 = product of:
      0.01780844 = sum of:
        0.01780844 = weight(_text_:22 in 1347) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.01780844 = score(doc=1347,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.076713994 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.021906832 = queryNorm
            0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 1347, 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=1347)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.11111111 = coord(2/18)
    Abstract
    Terminology registries (TRs) are a crucial element of the infrastructure required for resource discovery services, digital libraries, Linked Data, and semantic interoperability generally. They can make the content of knowledge organization systems (KOS) available both for human and machine access. The paper describes the attributes and functionality for a TR, based on a review of published literature, existing TRs, and a survey of experts. A domain model based on user tasks is constructed and a set of core metadata elements for use in TRs is proposed. Ideally, the TR should allow searching as well as browsing for a KOS, matching a user's search while also providing information about existing terminology services, accessible to both humans and machines. The issues surrounding metadata for KOS are also discussed, together with the rationale for different aspects and the importance of a core set of KOS metadata for future machine-based access; a possible core set of metadata elements is proposed. This is dealt with in terms of practical experience and in relation to the Dublin Core Application Profile.
    Date
    22. 8.2014 17:12:54
  20. Heckner, M.; Mühlbacher, S.; Wolff, C.: Tagging tagging : a classification model for user keywords in scientific bibliography management systems (2007) 0.00 
    0.0011661798 = product of:
  0.010495618 = sum of:
    0.005664805 = weight(_text_:in in 533) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.005664805 = score(doc=533,freq=20.0), product of:
        0.029798867 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.021906832 = queryNorm
        0.19010136 = fieldWeight in 533, product of:
          4.472136 = tf(freq=20.0), with freq of:
            20.0 = termFreq=20.0
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=533)
    0.0048308135 = weight(_text_:der in 533) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0048308135 = score(doc=533,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.048934754 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.2337668 = idf(docFreq=12875, maxDocs=44218)
          0.021906832 = queryNorm
        0.09871948 = fieldWeight in 533, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          2.2337668 = idf(docFreq=12875, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=533)
  0.11111111 = coord(2/18)
    Abstract
    Recently, a growing amount of systems that allow personal content annotation (tagging) are being created, ranging from personal sites for organising bookmarks (del.icio.us), photos (flickr.com) or videos (video.google.com, youtube.com) to systems for managing bibliographies for scientific research projects (citeulike.org, connotea.org). Simultaneously, a debate on the pro and cons of allowing users to add personal keywords to digital content has arisen. One recurrent point-of-discussion is whether tagging can solve the well-known vocabulary problem: In order to support successful retrieval in complex environments, it is necessary to index an object with a variety of aliases (cf. Furnas 1987). In this spirit, social tagging enhances the pool of rigid, traditional keywording by adding user-created retrieval vocabularies. Furthermore, tagging goes beyond simple personal content-based keywords by providing meta-keywords like funny or interesting that "identify qualities or characteristics" (Golder and Huberman 2006, Kipp and Campbell 2006, Kipp 2007, Feinberg 2006, Kroski 2005). Contrarily, tagging systems are claimed to lead to semantic difficulties that may hinder the precision and recall of tagging systems (e.g. the polysemy problem, cf. Marlow 2006, Lakoff 2005, Golder and Huberman 2006). Empirical research on social tagging is still rare and mostly from a computer linguistics or librarian point-of-view (Voß 2007) which focus either on the automatic statistical analyses of large data sets, or intellectually inspect single cases of tag usage: Some scientists studied the evolution of tag vocabularies and tag distribution in specific systems (Golder and Huberman 2006, Hammond 2005). Others concentrate on tagging behaviour and tagger characteristics in collaborative systems. (Hammond 2005, Kipp and Campbell 2007, Feinberg 2006, Sen 2006). However, little research has been conducted on the functional and linguistic characteristics of tags.1 An analysis of these patterns could show differences between user wording and conventional keywording. In order to provide a reasonable basis for comparison, a classification system for existing tags is needed.
    Therefore our main research questions are as follows: - Is it possible to discover regular patterns in tag usage and to establish a stable category model? - Does a specific tagging language comparable to internet slang or chatspeak evolve? - How do social tags differ from traditional (author / expert) keywords? - To what degree are social tags taken from or findable in the full text of the tagged resource? - Do tags in a research literature context go beyond simple content description (e.g. tags indicating time or task-related information, cf. Kipp et al. 2006)?
    Content
    Präsentation während der Veranstaltung "Networked Knowledge Organization Systems and Services: The 6th European Networked Knowledge Organization Systems (NKOS) Workshop, Workshop at the 11th ECDL Conference, Budapest, Hungary, September 21st 2007".

Authors

Years

Types

  • a 154
  • el 75
  • m 14
  • s 7
  • x 4
  • r 3
  • n 2
  • p 2
  • More… Less…

Themes

Subjects

Classifications