Search (3 results, page 1 of 1)

  • × language_ss:"e"
  • × theme_ss:"Universale Facettenklassifikationen"
  • × theme_ss:"Wissensrepräsentation"
  1. Hudon, M.: Facet (2020) 0.00
    0.0024982654 = product of:
      0.017487857 = sum of:
        0.017487857 = weight(_text_:with in 5899) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.017487857 = score(doc=5899,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.09383348 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.409771 = idf(docFreq=10797, maxDocs=44218)
              0.038938753 = queryNorm
            0.1863712 = fieldWeight in 5899, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              2.409771 = idf(docFreq=10797, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=5899)
      0.14285715 = coord(1/7)
    
    Abstract
    S.R. Ranganathan is credited with the introduction of the term "facet" in the field of knowledge organization towards the middle of the twentieth century. Facets have traditionally been used to organize document collections and to express complex subjects. In the digital world, they act as filters to facilitate navigation and improve retrieval. But the popularity of the term does not mean that a definitive characterization of the concept has been established. Indeed, several conceptualizations of the facet co-exist. This article provides an overview of formal and informal definitions found in the literature of knowledge organization, followed by a discussion of four common conceptualizations of the facet: process vs product, nature vs function, object vs subject and organization vs navigation.
  2. Broughton, V.: Facet analysis as a tool for modelling subject domains and terminologies (2011) 0.00
    0.0017844755 = product of:
      0.012491328 = sum of:
        0.012491328 = weight(_text_:with in 4826) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.012491328 = score(doc=4826,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.09383348 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.409771 = idf(docFreq=10797, maxDocs=44218)
              0.038938753 = queryNorm
            0.1331223 = fieldWeight in 4826, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              2.409771 = idf(docFreq=10797, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4826)
      0.14285715 = coord(1/7)
    
    Abstract
    Facet analysis is proposed as a general theory of knowledge organization, with an associated methodology that may be applied to the development of terminology tools in a variety of contexts and formats. Faceted classifications originated as a means of representing complexity in semantic content that facilitates logical organization and effective retrieval in a physical environment. This is achieved through meticulous analysis of concepts, their structural and functional status (based on fundamental categories), and their inter-relationships. These features provide an excellent basis for the general conceptual modelling of domains, and for the generation of KOS other than systematic classifications. This is demonstrated by the adoption of a faceted approach to many web search and visualization tools, and by the emergence of a facet based methodology for the construction of thesauri. Current work on the Bliss Bibliographic Classification (Second Edition) is investigating the ways in which the full complexity of faceted structures may be represented through encoded data, capable of generating intellectually and mechanically compatible forms of indexing tools from a single source. It is suggested that a number of research questions relating to the Semantic Web could be tackled through the medium of facet analysis.
  3. Ghosh, S.; Panigrahi, P.: Use of Ranganathan's analytico-synthetic approach in developing a domain ontology in library and information science (2015) 0.00
    0.0017844755 = product of:
      0.012491328 = sum of:
        0.012491328 = weight(_text_:with in 2798) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.012491328 = score(doc=2798,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.09383348 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.409771 = idf(docFreq=10797, maxDocs=44218)
              0.038938753 = queryNorm
            0.1331223 = fieldWeight in 2798, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              2.409771 = idf(docFreq=10797, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2798)
      0.14285715 = coord(1/7)
    
    Abstract
    Classification is the basis of knowledge organization. Ontology, a comparatively new concept used as a tool for knowledge organization, establishes connections between terms and concepts enhancing the scope and usefulness of library classification. Ranganathan had invented the strong theory of the analytico-synthetic method in classification and devised Colon Classification. In this study a domain ontology on library and information science has been developed by implementing Raganathan's faceted approach of classification. The hierarchical relationships among terms have been established primarily keeping conformity with that of Ranganathan's Colon Classification (7th edition). But to accommodate new vocabularies, DDC 23rd edition and UDC Standard edition are consulted. The Protégé ontology editor has been used. The study carefully examines the steps in which the analytico-synthetic method have been followed. Ranganathan's Canon of Characteristics and its relevant Canons have been followed for defining the class-subclass hierarchy. It concludes by identifying the drawbacks as well as the merits faced while developing the ontology. This paper proves the relevance and importance of Ranganathan's philosophy in developing ontology based knowledge organization.