Search (238 results, page 1 of 12)

  • × language_ss:"e"
  • × theme_ss:"Wissensrepräsentation"
  • × type_ss:"a"
  1. Zeng, Q.; Yu, M.; Yu, W.; Xiong, J.; Shi, Y.; Jiang, M.: Faceted hierarchy : a new graph type to organize scientific concepts and a construction method (2019) 0.03
    0.033781838 = product of:
      0.08445459 = sum of:
        0.07482965 = product of:
          0.22448896 = sum of:
            0.22448896 = weight(_text_:3a in 400) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.22448896 = score(doc=400,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.39943373 = queryWeight, product of:
                  8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.047114085 = queryNorm
                0.56201804 = fieldWeight in 400, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=400)
          0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
        0.009624934 = weight(_text_:information in 400) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.009624934 = score(doc=400,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.08270773 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.047114085 = queryNorm
            0.116372846 = fieldWeight in 400, 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=400)
      0.4 = coord(2/5)
    
    Abstract
    On a scientific concept hierarchy, a parent concept may have a few attributes, each of which has multiple values being a group of child concepts. We call these attributes facets: classification has a few facets such as application (e.g., face recognition), model (e.g., svm, knn), and metric (e.g., precision). In this work, we aim at building faceted concept hierarchies from scientific literature. Hierarchy construction methods heavily rely on hypernym detection, however, the faceted relations are parent-to-child links but the hypernym relation is a multi-hop, i.e., ancestor-to-descendent link with a specific facet "type-of". We use information extraction techniques to find synonyms, sibling concepts, and ancestor-descendent relations from a data science corpus. And we propose a hierarchy growth algorithm to infer the parent-child links from the three types of relationships. It resolves conflicts by maintaining the acyclic structure of a hierarchy.
    Content
    Vgl.: https%3A%2F%2Faclanthology.org%2FD19-5317.pdf&usg=AOvVaw0ZZFyq5wWTtNTvNkrvjlGA.
  2. Scheir, P.; Pammer, V.; Lindstaedt, S.N.: Information retrieval on the Semantic Web : does it exist? (2007) 0.02
    0.017203344 = product of:
      0.043008357 = sum of:
        0.02510901 = weight(_text_:information in 4329) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.02510901 = score(doc=4329,freq=10.0), product of:
            0.08270773 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.047114085 = queryNorm
            0.3035872 = fieldWeight in 4329, product of:
              3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
                10.0 = termFreq=10.0
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=4329)
        0.017899347 = weight(_text_:und in 4329) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.017899347 = score(doc=4329,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.10442211 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
              0.047114085 = queryNorm
            0.17141339 = fieldWeight in 4329, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=4329)
      0.4 = coord(2/5)
    
    Abstract
    Plenty of contemporary attempts to search exist that are associated with the area of Semantic Web. But which of them qualify as information retrieval for the Semantic Web? Do such approaches exist? To answer these questions we take a look at the nature of the Semantic Web and Semantic Desktop and at definitions for information and data retrieval. We survey current approaches referred to by their authors as information retrieval for the Semantic Web or that use Semantic Web technology for search.
    Content
    Enthält einen Überblick über Modelle, Systeme und Projekte
    Source
    Lernen - Wissen - Adaption : workshop proceedings / LWA 2007, Halle, September 2007. Martin Luther University Halle-Wittenberg, Institute for Informatics, Databases and Information Systems. Hrsg.: Alexander Hinneburg
  3. Mainz, I.; Weller, K.; Paulsen, I.; Mainz, D.; Kohl, J.; Haeseler, A. von: Ontoverse : collaborative ontology engineering for the life sciences (2008) 0.02
    0.016705183 = product of:
      0.04176296 = sum of:
        0.012833246 = weight(_text_:information in 1594) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.012833246 = score(doc=1594,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.08270773 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.047114085 = queryNorm
            0.1551638 = fieldWeight in 1594, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=1594)
        0.028929714 = weight(_text_:und in 1594) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.028929714 = score(doc=1594,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.10442211 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
              0.047114085 = queryNorm
            0.27704588 = fieldWeight in 1594, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=1594)
      0.4 = coord(2/5)
    
    Abstract
    Ontologien werden als eine neue Methode zur detaillierten und formalisierten Wissensrepräsentation vorgestellt, dabei liegt der Schwerpunkt auf dem Einsatz von Ontologien in den Lebenswissenschaften. Wir zeigen, dass für ausgereifte wissenschaftliche Ontologien Ansätze zur gemeinschaftlichen Erarbeitung notwendig sind. Das Ontoverse Ontologie-Wiki wird vorgestellt; es ist ein Hilfsmittel, das alle Phasen des gemeinschaftlichen Ontologieaufbaus unterstützt.
    Source
    Information - Wissenschaft und Praxis. 59(2008) H.2, S.91-99
  4. Beppler, F.D.; Fonseca, F.T.; Pacheco, R.C.S.: Hermeneus: an architecture for an ontology-enabled information retrieval (2008) 0.02
    0.016268773 = product of:
      0.04067193 = sum of:
        0.021522008 = weight(_text_:information in 3261) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.021522008 = score(doc=3261,freq=10.0), product of:
            0.08270773 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.047114085 = queryNorm
            0.2602176 = fieldWeight in 3261, 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=3261)
        0.019149924 = product of:
          0.038299847 = sum of:
            0.038299847 = weight(_text_:22 in 3261) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.038299847 = score(doc=3261,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.1649855 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.047114085 = queryNorm
                0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 3261, 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=3261)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.4 = coord(2/5)
    
    Abstract
    Ontologies improve IR systems regarding its retrieval and presentation of information, which make the task of finding information more effective, efficient, and interactive. In this paper we argue that ontologies also greatly improve the engineering of such systems. We created a framework that uses ontology to drive the process of engineering an IR system. We developed a prototype that shows how a domain specialist without knowledge in the IR field can build an IR system with interactive components. The resulting system provides support for users not only to find their information needs but also to extend their state of knowledge. This way, our approach to ontology-enabled information retrieval addresses both the engineering aspect described here and also the usability aspect described elsewhere.
    Date
    28.11.2016 12:43:22
  5. Garshol, L.M.: Metadata? Thesauri? Taxonomies? Topic Maps! : making sense of it all (2005) 0.02
    0.015567391 = product of:
      0.038918477 = sum of:
        0.023576178 = weight(_text_:information in 4729) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.023576178 = score(doc=4729,freq=12.0), product of:
            0.08270773 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.047114085 = queryNorm
            0.2850541 = fieldWeight in 4729, product of:
              3.4641016 = tf(freq=12.0), with freq of:
                12.0 = termFreq=12.0
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4729)
        0.015342298 = weight(_text_:und in 4729) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.015342298 = score(doc=4729,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.10442211 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
              0.047114085 = queryNorm
            0.14692576 = fieldWeight in 4729, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4729)
      0.4 = coord(2/5)
    
    Abstract
    The task of an information architect is to create web sites where users can actually find the information they are looking for. As the ocean of information rises and leaves what we seek ever more deeply buried in what we don't seek, this discipline becomes ever more relevant. Information architecture involves many different aspects of web site creation and organization, but its principal tools are information organization techniques developed in other disciplines. Most of these techniques come from library science, such as thesauri, taxonomies, and faceted classification. Topic maps are a relative newcomer to this area and bring with them the promise of better-organized web sites, compared to what is possible with existing techniques. However, it is not generally understood how topic maps relate to the traditional techniques, and what advantages and disadvantages they have, compared to these techniques. The aim of this paper is to help build a better understanding of these issues.
    Source
    Journal of information science. 30(2005) no.4, S.378-391
    Theme
    Konzeption und Anwendung des Prinzips Thesaurus
  6. Das, S.; Roy, S.: Faceted ontological model for brain tumour study (2016) 0.02
    0.015457782 = product of:
      0.038644455 = sum of:
        0.022686187 = weight(_text_:information in 2831) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.022686187 = score(doc=2831,freq=16.0), product of:
            0.08270773 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.047114085 = queryNorm
            0.27429342 = fieldWeight in 2831, product of:
              4.0 = tf(freq=16.0), with freq of:
                16.0 = termFreq=16.0
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2831)
        0.01595827 = product of:
          0.03191654 = sum of:
            0.03191654 = weight(_text_:22 in 2831) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.03191654 = score(doc=2831,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.1649855 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.047114085 = queryNorm
                0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 2831, 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=2831)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.4 = coord(2/5)
    
    Abstract
    The purpose of this work is to develop an ontology-based framework for developing an information retrieval system to cater to specific queries of users. For creating such an ontology, information was obtained from a wide range of information sources involved with brain tumour study and research. The information thus obtained was compiled and analysed to provide a standard, reliable and relevant information base to aid our proposed system. Facet-based methodology has been used for ontology formalization for quite some time. Ontology formalization involves different steps such as identification of the terminology, analysis, synthesis, standardization and ordering. A vast majority of the ontologies being developed nowadays lack flexibility. This becomes a formidable constraint when it comes to interoperability. We found that a facet-based method provides a distinct guideline for the development of a robust and flexible model concerning the domain of brain tumours. Our attempt has been to bridge library and information science and computer science, which itself involved an experimental approach. It was discovered that a faceted approach is really enduring, as it helps in the achievement of properties like navigation, exploration and faceted browsing. Computer-based brain tumour ontology supports the work of researchers towards gathering information on brain tumour research and allows users across the world to intelligently access new scientific information quickly and efficiently.
    Date
    12. 3.2016 13:21:22
  7. Bittner, T.; Donnelly, M.; Winter, S.: Ontology and semantic interoperability (2006) 0.02
    0.015359918 = product of:
      0.038399793 = sum of:
        0.019249868 = weight(_text_:information in 4820) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.019249868 = score(doc=4820,freq=8.0), product of:
            0.08270773 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.047114085 = queryNorm
            0.23274569 = fieldWeight in 4820, product of:
              2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
                8.0 = termFreq=8.0
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4820)
        0.019149924 = product of:
          0.038299847 = sum of:
            0.038299847 = weight(_text_:22 in 4820) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.038299847 = score(doc=4820,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.1649855 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.047114085 = 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)
      0.4 = coord(2/5)
    
    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
  8. Priss, U.: Faceted information representation (2000) 0.02
    0.015288765 = product of:
      0.03822191 = sum of:
        0.015880331 = weight(_text_:information in 5095) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.015880331 = score(doc=5095,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.08270773 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.047114085 = queryNorm
            0.1920054 = fieldWeight in 5095, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=5095)
        0.022341577 = product of:
          0.044683155 = sum of:
            0.044683155 = weight(_text_:22 in 5095) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.044683155 = score(doc=5095,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.1649855 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.047114085 = queryNorm
                0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 5095, 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=5095)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.4 = coord(2/5)
    
    Abstract
    This paper presents an abstract formalization of the notion of "facets". Facets are relational structures of units, relations and other facets selected for a certain purpose. Facets can be used to structure large knowledge representation systems into a hierarchical arrangement of consistent and independent subsystems (facets) that facilitate flexibility and combinations of different viewpoints or aspects. This paper describes the basic notions, facet characteristics and construction mechanisms. It then explicates the theory in an example of a faceted information retrieval system (FaIR)
    Date
    22. 1.2016 17:47:06
  9. Eito-Brun, R.: Ontologies and the exchange of technical information : building a knowledge repository based on ECSS standards (2014) 0.01
    0.014710167 = product of:
      0.036775418 = sum of:
        0.024008803 = weight(_text_:information in 1436) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.024008803 = score(doc=1436,freq=28.0), product of:
            0.08270773 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.047114085 = queryNorm
            0.29028487 = fieldWeight in 1436, product of:
              5.2915025 = tf(freq=28.0), with freq of:
                28.0 = termFreq=28.0
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=1436)
        0.0127666155 = product of:
          0.025533231 = sum of:
            0.025533231 = weight(_text_:22 in 1436) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.025533231 = score(doc=1436,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.1649855 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.047114085 = queryNorm
                0.15476047 = fieldWeight in 1436, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=1436)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.4 = coord(2/5)
    
    Abstract
    The development of complex projects in the aerospace industry is based on the collaboration of geographically distributed teams and companies. In this context, the need of sharing different types of data and information is a key factor to assure the successful execution of the projects. In the case of European projects, the ECSS standards provide a normative framework that specifies, among other requirements, the different document types, information items and artifacts that need to be generated. The specification of the characteristics of these information items are usually incorporated as annex to the different ECSS standards, and they provide the intended purpose, scope, and structure of the documents and information items. In these standards, documents or deliverables should not be considered as independent items, but as the results of packaging different information artifacts for their delivery between the involved parties. Successful information integration and knowledge exchange cannot be based exclusively on the conceptual definition of information types. It also requires the definition of methods and techniques for serializing and exchanging these documents and artifacts. This area is not covered by ECSS standards, and the definition of these data schemas would improve the opportunity for improving collaboration processes among companies. This paper describes the development of an OWL-based ontology to manage the different artifacts and information items requested in the European Space Agency (ESA) ECSS standards for SW development. The ECSS set of standards is the main reference in aerospace projects in Europe, and in addition to engineering and managerial requirements they provide a set of DRD (Document Requirements Documents) with the structure of the different documents and records necessary to manage projects and describe intermediate information products and final deliverables. Information integration is a must-have in aerospace projects, where different players need to collaborate and share data during the life cycle of the products about requirements, design elements, problems, etc. The proposed ontology provides the basis for building advanced information systems where the information coming from different companies and institutions can be integrated into a coherent set of related data. It also provides a conceptual framework to enable the development of interfaces and gateways between the different tools and information systems used by the different players in aerospace projects.
    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
  10. Gladun, A.; Rogushina, J.: Development of domain thesaurus as a set of ontology concepts with use of semantic similarity and elements of combinatorial optimization (2021) 0.01
    0.013511873 = product of:
      0.03377968 = sum of:
        0.015880331 = weight(_text_:information in 572) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.015880331 = score(doc=572,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.08270773 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.047114085 = queryNorm
            0.1920054 = fieldWeight in 572, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=572)
        0.017899347 = weight(_text_:und in 572) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.017899347 = score(doc=572,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.10442211 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
              0.047114085 = queryNorm
            0.17141339 = fieldWeight in 572, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=572)
      0.4 = coord(2/5)
    
    Abstract
    We consider use of ontological background knowledge in intelligent information systems and analyze directions of their reduction in compliance with specifics of particular user task. Such reduction is aimed at simplification of knowledge processing without loss of significant information. We propose methods of generation of task thesauri based on domain ontology that contain such subset of ontological concepts and relations that can be used in task solving. Combinatorial optimization is used for minimization of task thesaurus. In this approach, semantic similarity estimates are used for determination of concept significance for user task. Some practical examples of optimized thesauri application for semantic retrieval and competence analysis demonstrate efficiency of proposed approach.
    Theme
    Konzeption und Anwendung des Prinzips Thesaurus
  11. Priss, U.: Faceted knowledge representation (1999) 0.01
    0.013428268 = product of:
      0.03357067 = sum of:
        0.01122909 = weight(_text_:information in 2654) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.01122909 = score(doc=2654,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.08270773 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.047114085 = queryNorm
            0.13576832 = fieldWeight in 2654, 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=2654)
        0.022341577 = product of:
          0.044683155 = sum of:
            0.044683155 = weight(_text_:22 in 2654) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.044683155 = score(doc=2654,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.1649855 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.047114085 = queryNorm
                0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 2654, 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=2654)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.4 = coord(2/5)
    
    Abstract
    Faceted Knowledge Representation provides a formalism for implementing knowledge systems. The basic notions of faceted knowledge representation are "unit", "relation", "facet" and "interpretation". Units are atomic elements and can be abstract elements or refer to external objects in an application. Relations are sequences or matrices of 0 and 1's (binary matrices). Facets are relational structures that combine units and relations. Each facet represents an aspect or viewpoint of a knowledge system. Interpretations are mappings that can be used to translate between different representations. This paper introduces the basic notions of faceted knowledge representation. The formalism is applied here to an abstract modeling of a faceted thesaurus as used in information retrieval.
    Date
    22. 1.2016 17:30:31
  12. Renear, A.H.; Wickett, K.M.; Urban, R.J.; Dubin, D.; Shreeves, S.L.: Collection/item metadata relationships (2008) 0.01
    0.013104655 = product of:
      0.032761637 = sum of:
        0.0136117125 = weight(_text_:information in 2623) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.0136117125 = score(doc=2623,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.08270773 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.047114085 = queryNorm
            0.16457605 = fieldWeight in 2623, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2623)
        0.019149924 = product of:
          0.038299847 = sum of:
            0.038299847 = weight(_text_:22 in 2623) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.038299847 = score(doc=2623,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.1649855 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.047114085 = queryNorm
                0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 2623, 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=2623)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.4 = coord(2/5)
    
    Abstract
    Contemporary retrieval systems, which search across collections, usually ignore collection-level metadata. Alternative approaches, exploiting collection-level information, will require an understanding of the various kinds of relationships that can obtain between collection-level and item-level metadata. This paper outlines the problem and describes a project that is developing a logic-based framework for classifying collection/item metadata relationships. This framework will support (i) metadata specification developers defining metadata elements, (ii) metadata creators describing objects, and (iii) system designers implementing systems that take advantage of collection-level metadata. We present three examples of collection/item metadata relationship categories, attribute/value-propagation, value-propagation, and value-constraint and show that even in these simple cases a precise formulation requires modal notions in addition to first-order logic. These formulations are related to recent work in information retrieval and ontology evaluation.
    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
  13. Kruk, S.R.; Kruk, E.; Stankiewicz, K.: Evaluation of semantic and social technologies for digital libraries (2009) 0.01
    0.013104655 = product of:
      0.032761637 = sum of:
        0.0136117125 = weight(_text_:information in 3387) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.0136117125 = score(doc=3387,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.08270773 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.047114085 = queryNorm
            0.16457605 = fieldWeight in 3387, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=3387)
        0.019149924 = product of:
          0.038299847 = sum of:
            0.038299847 = weight(_text_:22 in 3387) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.038299847 = score(doc=3387,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.1649855 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.047114085 = queryNorm
                0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 3387, 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=3387)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.4 = coord(2/5)
    
    Abstract
    Libraries are the tools we use to learn and to answer our questions. The quality of our work depends, among others, on the quality of the tools we use. Recent research in digital libraries is focused, on one hand on improving the infrastructure of the digital library management systems (DLMS), and on the other on improving the metadata models used to annotate collections of objects maintained by DLMS. The latter includes, among others, the semantic web and social networking technologies. Recently, the semantic web and social networking technologies are being introduced to the digital libraries domain. The expected outcome is that the overall quality of information discovery in digital libraries can be improved by employing social and semantic technologies. In this chapter we present the results of an evaluation of social and semantic end-user information discovery services for the digital libraries.
    Date
    1. 8.2010 12:35:22
  14. Baião Salgado Silva, G.; Lima, G.Â. Borém de Oliveira: Using topic maps in establishing compatibility of semantically structured hypertext contents (2012) 0.01
    0.012799931 = product of:
      0.031999826 = sum of:
        0.016041556 = weight(_text_:information in 633) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.016041556 = score(doc=633,freq=8.0), product of:
            0.08270773 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.047114085 = queryNorm
            0.19395474 = fieldWeight in 633, product of:
              2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
                8.0 = termFreq=8.0
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=633)
        0.01595827 = product of:
          0.03191654 = sum of:
            0.03191654 = weight(_text_:22 in 633) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.03191654 = score(doc=633,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.1649855 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.047114085 = queryNorm
                0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 633, 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=633)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.4 = coord(2/5)
    
    Abstract
    Considering the characteristics of hypertext systems and problems such as cognitive overload and the disorientation of users, this project studies subject hypertext documents that have undergone conceptual structuring using facets for content representation and improvement of information retrieval during navigation. The main objective was to assess the possibility of the application of topic map technology for automating the compatibilization process of these structures. For this purpose, two dissertations from the UFMG Information Science Post-Graduation Program were adopted as samples. Both dissertations had been duly analyzed and structured on the MHTX (Hypertextual Map) prototype database. The faceted structures of both dissertations, which had been represented in conceptual maps, were then converted into topic maps. It was then possible to use the merge property of the topic maps to promote the semantic interrelationship between the maps and, consequently, between the hypertextual information resources proper. The merge results were then analyzed in the light of theories dealing with the compatibilization of languages developed within the realm of information technology and librarianship from the 1960s on. The main goals accomplished were: (a) the detailed conceptualization of the merge process of the topic maps, considering the possible compatibilization levels and the applicability of this technology in the integration of faceted structures; and (b) the production of a detailed sequence of steps that may be used in the implementation of topic maps based on faceted structures.
    Date
    22. 2.2013 11:39:23
  15. Cui, H.: Competency evaluation of plant character ontologies against domain literature (2010) 0.01
    0.011940267 = product of:
      0.029850667 = sum of:
        0.013892397 = weight(_text_:information in 3466) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.013892397 = score(doc=3466,freq=6.0), product of:
            0.08270773 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.047114085 = queryNorm
            0.16796975 = fieldWeight in 3466, 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=3466)
        0.01595827 = product of:
          0.03191654 = sum of:
            0.03191654 = weight(_text_:22 in 3466) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.03191654 = score(doc=3466,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.1649855 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.047114085 = queryNorm
                0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 3466, 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=3466)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.4 = coord(2/5)
    
    Abstract
    Specimen identification keys are still the most commonly created tools used by systematic biologists to access biodiversity information. Creating identification keys requires analyzing and synthesizing large amounts of information from specimens and their descriptions and is a very labor-intensive and time-consuming activity. Automating the generation of identification keys from text descriptions becomes a highly attractive text mining application in the biodiversity domain. Fine-grained semantic annotation of morphological descriptions of organisms is a necessary first step in generating keys from text. Machine-readable ontologies are needed in this process because most biological characters are only implied (i.e., not stated) in descriptions. The immediate question to ask is How well do existing ontologies support semantic annotation and automated key generation? With the intention to either select an existing ontology or develop a unified ontology based on existing ones, this paper evaluates the coverage, semantic consistency, and inter-ontology agreement of a biodiversity character ontology and three plant glossaries that may be turned into ontologies. The coverage and semantic consistency of the ontology/glossaries are checked against the authoritative domain literature, namely, Flora of North America and Flora of China. The evaluation results suggest that more work is needed to improve the coverage and interoperability of the ontology/glossaries. More concepts need to be added to the ontology/glossaries and careful work is needed to improve the semantic consistency. The method used in this paper to evaluate the ontology/glossaries can be used to propose new candidate concepts from the domain literature and suggest appropriate definitions.
    Date
    1. 6.2010 9:55:22
    Source
    Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 61(2010) no.6, S.1144-1165
  16. Conde, A.; Larrañaga, M.; Arruarte, A.; Elorriaga, J.A.; Roth, D.: litewi: a combined term extraction and entity linking method for eliciting educational ontologies from textbooks (2016) 0.01
    0.011940267 = product of:
      0.029850667 = sum of:
        0.013892397 = weight(_text_:information in 2645) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.013892397 = score(doc=2645,freq=6.0), product of:
            0.08270773 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.047114085 = queryNorm
            0.16796975 = fieldWeight in 2645, 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=2645)
        0.01595827 = product of:
          0.03191654 = sum of:
            0.03191654 = weight(_text_:22 in 2645) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.03191654 = score(doc=2645,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.1649855 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.047114085 = queryNorm
                0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 2645, 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=2645)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.4 = coord(2/5)
    
    Abstract
    Major efforts have been conducted on ontology learning, that is, semiautomatic processes for the construction of domain ontologies from diverse sources of information. In the past few years, a research trend has focused on the construction of educational ontologies, that is, ontologies to be used for educational purposes. The identification of the terminology is crucial to build ontologies. Term extraction techniques allow the identification of the domain-related terms from electronic resources. This paper presents LiTeWi, a novel method that combines current unsupervised term extraction approaches for creating educational ontologies for technology supported learning systems from electronic textbooks. LiTeWi uses Wikipedia as an additional information source. Wikipedia contains more than 30 million articles covering the terminology of nearly every domain in 288 languages, which makes it an appropriate generic corpus for term extraction. Furthermore, given that its content is available in several languages, it promotes both domain and language independence. LiTeWi is aimed at being used by teachers, who usually develop their didactic material from textbooks. To evaluate its performance, LiTeWi was tuned up using a textbook on object oriented programming and then tested with two textbooks of different domains-astronomy and molecular biology.
    Date
    22. 1.2016 12:38:14
    Source
    Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology. 67(2016) no.2, S.380-399
  17. Peters, I.; Weller. K.: Paradigmatic and syntagmatic relations in knowledge organization systems (2008) 0.01
    0.011651375 = product of:
      0.029128438 = sum of:
        0.01122909 = weight(_text_:information in 1593) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.01122909 = score(doc=1593,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.08270773 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.047114085 = queryNorm
            0.13576832 = fieldWeight in 1593, 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=1593)
        0.017899347 = weight(_text_:und in 1593) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.017899347 = score(doc=1593,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.10442211 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
              0.047114085 = queryNorm
            0.17141339 = fieldWeight in 1593, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=1593)
      0.4 = coord(2/5)
    
    Source
    Information - Wissenschaft und Praxis. 59(2008) H.2, S.100-107
  18. Bandholtz, T.; Schulte-Coerne, T.; Glaser, R.; Fock, J.; Keller, T.: iQvoc - open source SKOS(XL) maintenance and publishing tool (2010) 0.01
    0.011651375 = product of:
      0.029128438 = sum of:
        0.01122909 = weight(_text_:information in 604) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.01122909 = score(doc=604,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.08270773 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.047114085 = queryNorm
            0.13576832 = fieldWeight in 604, 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=604)
        0.017899347 = weight(_text_:und in 604) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.017899347 = score(doc=604,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.10442211 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
              0.047114085 = queryNorm
            0.17141339 = fieldWeight in 604, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=604)
      0.4 = coord(2/5)
    
    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.
    Theme
    Konzeption und Anwendung des Prinzips Thesaurus
  19. Cimiano, P.; Völker, J.; Studer, R.: Ontologies on demand? : a description of the state-of-the-art, applications, challenges and trends for ontology learning from text (2006) 0.01
    0.011581604 = product of:
      0.02895401 = sum of:
        0.0136117125 = weight(_text_:information in 6014) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.0136117125 = score(doc=6014,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.08270773 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.047114085 = queryNorm
            0.16457605 = fieldWeight in 6014, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=6014)
        0.015342298 = weight(_text_:und in 6014) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.015342298 = score(doc=6014,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.10442211 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
              0.047114085 = queryNorm
            0.14692576 = fieldWeight in 6014, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=6014)
      0.4 = coord(2/5)
    
    Abstract
    Ontologies are nowadays used for many applications requiring data, services and resources in general to be interoperable and machine understandable. Such applications are for example web service discovery and composition, information integration across databases, intelligent search, etc. The general idea is that data and services are semantically described with respect to ontologies, which are formal specifications of a domain of interest, and can thus be shared and reused in a way such that the shared meaning specified by the ontology remains formally the same across different parties and applications. As the cost of creating ontologies is relatively high, different proposals have emerged for learning ontologies from structured and unstructured resources. In this article we examine the maturity of techniques for ontology learning from textual resources, addressing the question whether the state-of-the-art is mature enough to produce ontologies 'on demand'.
    Source
    Information - Wissenschaft und Praxis. 57(2006) H.6/7, S.315-320
  20. Giri, K.; Gokhale, P.: Developing a banking service ontology using Protégé, an open source software (2015) 0.01
    0.0115307225 = product of:
      0.028826805 = sum of:
        0.016041556 = weight(_text_:information in 2793) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.016041556 = score(doc=2793,freq=8.0), product of:
            0.08270773 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.047114085 = queryNorm
            0.19395474 = fieldWeight in 2793, product of:
              2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
                8.0 = termFreq=8.0
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2793)
        0.012785248 = weight(_text_:und in 2793) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.012785248 = score(doc=2793,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.10442211 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
              0.047114085 = queryNorm
            0.12243814 = fieldWeight in 2793, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2793)
      0.4 = coord(2/5)
    
    Abstract
    Computers have transformed from single isolated devices to entry points into a worldwide network of information exchange. Consequently, support in the exchange of data, information, and knowledge is becoming the key issue in computer technology today. The increasing volume of data available on the Web makes information retrieval a tedious and difficult task. Researchers are now exploring the possibility of creating a semantic web, in which meaning is made explicit, allowing machines to process and integrate web resources intelligently. The vision of the semantic web introduces the next generation of the Web by establishing a layer of machine-understandable data. The success of the semantic web depends on the easy creation, integration and use of semantic data, which will depend on web ontology. The faceted approach towards analyzing and representing knowledge given by S R Ranganathan would be useful in this regard. Ontology development in different fields is one such area where this approach given by Ranganathan could be applied. This paper presents a case of developing ontology for the field of banking.
    Footnote
    Beitrag in einem Themenheft zu Leben und Werk von S.R. Ranganathan.
    Source
    Annals of library and information studies. 62(2015) no.4, S.281-285

Years

Types

  • el 39
  • x 1
  • More… Less…