Search (149 results, page 1 of 8)

  • × 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) 0.18
    0.1819951 = product of:
      0.4246552 = sum of:
        0.060665026 = product of:
          0.18199508 = sum of:
            0.18199508 = weight(_text_:3a in 400) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.18199508 = score(doc=400,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.32382426 = queryWeight, product of:
                  8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.03819578 = 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)
        0.18199508 = weight(_text_:2f in 400) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.18199508 = score(doc=400,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.32382426 = queryWeight, product of:
              8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03819578 = 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)
        0.18199508 = weight(_text_:2f in 400) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.18199508 = score(doc=400,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.32382426 = queryWeight, product of:
              8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03819578 = 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)
      0.42857143 = coord(3/7)
    
    Content
    Vgl.: https%3A%2F%2Faclanthology.org%2FD19-5317.pdf&usg=AOvVaw0ZZFyq5wWTtNTvNkrvjlGA.
  2. Rindflesch, T.C.; Aronson, A.R.: Semantic processing in information retrieval (1993) 0.02
    0.020750104 = product of:
      0.07262536 = sum of:
        0.06044075 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 4121) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.06044075 = score(doc=4121,freq=10.0), product of:
            0.11553899 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03819578 = queryNorm
            0.5231199 = fieldWeight in 4121, product of:
              3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
                10.0 = termFreq=10.0
              3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=4121)
        0.0121846115 = product of:
          0.036553834 = sum of:
            0.036553834 = weight(_text_:29 in 4121) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.036553834 = score(doc=4121,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.13436082 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.03819578 = queryNorm
                0.27205724 = fieldWeight in 4121, 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=4121)
          0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
      0.2857143 = coord(2/7)
    
    Abstract
    Intuition suggests that one way to enhance the information retrieval process would be the use of phrases to characterize the contents of text. A number of researchers, however, have noted that phrases alone do not improve retrieval effectiveness. In this paper we briefly review the use of phrases in information retrieval and then suggest extensions to this paradigm using semantic information. We claim that semantic processing, which can be viewed as expressing relations between the concepts represented by phrases, will in fact enhance retrieval effectiveness. The availability of the UMLS® domain model, which we exploit extensively, significantly contributes to the feasibility of this processing.
    Date
    29. 6.2015 14:51:28
  3. Drexel, G.: Knowledge engineering for intelligent information retrieval (2001) 0.02
    0.017770756 = product of:
      0.06219764 = sum of:
        0.040129032 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 4043) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.040129032 = score(doc=4043,freq=6.0), product of:
            0.11553899 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03819578 = queryNorm
            0.34732026 = fieldWeight in 4043, product of:
              2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
                6.0 = termFreq=6.0
              3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4043)
        0.022068607 = weight(_text_:internet in 4043) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.022068607 = score(doc=4043,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.11276311 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.9522398 = idf(docFreq=6276, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03819578 = queryNorm
            0.1957077 = fieldWeight in 4043, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              2.9522398 = idf(docFreq=6276, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4043)
      0.2857143 = coord(2/7)
    
    Abstract
    This paper presents a clustered approach to designing an overall ontological model together with a general rule-based component that serves as a mapping device. By observational criteria, a multi-lingual team of experts excerpts concepts from general communication in the media. The team, then, finds equivalent expressions in English, German, French, and Spanish. On the basis of a set of ontological and lexical relations, a conceptual network is built up. Concepts are thought to be universal. Objects unique in time and space are identified by names and will be explained by the universals as their instances. Our approach relies on multi-relational descriptions of concepts. It provides a powerful tool for documentation and conceptual language learning. First and foremost, our multi-lingual, polyhierarchical ontology fills the gap of semantically-based information retrieval by generating enhanced and improved queries for internet search
    Theme
    Semantisches Umfeld in Indexierung u. Retrieval
  4. Atanassova, I.; Bertin, M.: Semantic facets for scientific information retrieval (2014) 0.02
    0.016857661 = product of:
      0.059001815 = sum of:
        0.046817202 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 4471) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.046817202 = score(doc=4471,freq=6.0), product of:
            0.11553899 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03819578 = queryNorm
            0.40520695 = fieldWeight in 4471, product of:
              2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
                6.0 = termFreq=6.0
              3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=4471)
        0.0121846115 = product of:
          0.036553834 = sum of:
            0.036553834 = weight(_text_:29 in 4471) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.036553834 = score(doc=4471,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.13436082 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.03819578 = queryNorm
                0.27205724 = fieldWeight in 4471, 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=4471)
          0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
      0.2857143 = coord(2/7)
    
    Abstract
    We present an Information Retrieval System for scientific publications that provides the possibility to filter results according to semantic facets. We use sentence-level semantic annotations that identify specific semantic relations in texts, such as methods, definitions, hypotheses, that correspond to common information needs related to scientific literature. The semantic annotations are obtained using a rule-based method that identifies linguistic clues organized into a linguistic ontology. The system is implemented using Solr Search Server and offers efficient search and navigation in scientific papers.
    Source
    Semantic Web Evaluation Challenge. SemWebEval 2014 at ESWC 2014, Anissaras, Crete, Greece, May 25-29, 2014, Revised Selected Papers. Eds.: V. Presutti et al
    Theme
    Semantisches Umfeld in Indexierung u. Retrieval
  5. Vallet, D.; Fernández, M.; Castells, P.: ¬An ontology-based information retrieval model (2005) 0.02
    0.016223133 = product of:
      0.056780964 = sum of:
        0.046337012 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 4708) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.046337012 = score(doc=4708,freq=8.0), product of:
            0.11553899 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03819578 = queryNorm
            0.40105087 = fieldWeight in 4708, product of:
              2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
                8.0 = termFreq=8.0
              3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4708)
        0.010443954 = product of:
          0.03133186 = sum of:
            0.03133186 = weight(_text_:29 in 4708) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.03133186 = score(doc=4708,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.13436082 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.03819578 = queryNorm
                0.23319192 = fieldWeight in 4708, 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=4708)
          0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
      0.2857143 = coord(2/7)
    
    Abstract
    Semantic search has been one of the motivations of the Semantic Web since it was envisioned. We propose a model for the exploitation of ontologybased KBs to improve search over large document repositories. Our approach includes an ontology-based scheme for the semi-automatic annotation of documents, and a retrieval system. The retrieval model is based on an adaptation of the classic vector-space model, including an annotation weighting algorithm, and a ranking algorithm. Semantic search is combined with keyword-based search to achieve tolerance to KB incompleteness. Our proposal is illustrated with sample experiments showing improvements with respect to keyword-based search, and providing ground for further research and discussion.
    Source
    The Semantic Web: research and applications ; second European Semantic WebConference, ESWC 2005, Heraklion, Crete, Greece, May 29 - June 1, 2005 ; proceedings. Eds.: A. Gómez-Pérez u. J. Euzenat
    Theme
    Semantisches Umfeld in Indexierung u. Retrieval
  6. Mestrovic, A.; Cali, A.: ¬An ontology-based approach to information retrieval (2017) 0.01
    0.014808962 = product of:
      0.051831365 = sum of:
        0.033440858 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 3489) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.033440858 = score(doc=3489,freq=6.0), product of:
            0.11553899 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03819578 = queryNorm
            0.28943354 = fieldWeight in 3489, product of:
              2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
                6.0 = termFreq=6.0
              3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3489)
        0.018390507 = weight(_text_:internet in 3489) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.018390507 = score(doc=3489,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.11276311 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.9522398 = idf(docFreq=6276, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03819578 = queryNorm
            0.16308975 = fieldWeight in 3489, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              2.9522398 = idf(docFreq=6276, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3489)
      0.2857143 = coord(2/7)
    
    Abstract
    We define a general framework for ontology-based information retrieval (IR). In our approach, document and query expansion rely on a base taxonomy that is extracted from a lexical database or a Linked Data set (e.g. WordNet, Wiktionary etc.). Each term from a document or query is modelled as a vector of base concepts from the base taxonomy. We define a set of mapping functions which map multiple ontological layers (dimensions) onto the base taxonomy. This way, each concept from the included ontologies can also be represented as a vector of base concepts from the base taxonomy. We propose a general weighting schema which is used for the vector space model. Our framework can therefore take into account various lexical and semantic relations between terms and concepts (e.g. synonymy, hierarchy, meronymy, antonymy, geo-proximity, etc.). This allows us to avoid certain vocabulary problems (e.g. synonymy, polysemy) as well as to reduce the vector size in the IR tasks.
    Content
    Vgl.: https://www.springerprofessional.de/an-ontology-based-approach-to-information-retrieval/12066802. Vgl. auch: http://www.keystone-cost.eu/ikc2016/program.php.
    Series
    Information Systems and Applications, incl. Internet/Web, and HCI; 10151
  7. Beppler, F.D.; Fonseca, F.T.; Pacheco, R.C.S.: Hermeneus: an architecture for an ontology-enabled information retrieval (2008) 0.01
    0.0144225815 = product of:
      0.050479032 = sum of:
        0.040129032 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 3261) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.040129032 = score(doc=3261,freq=6.0), product of:
            0.11553899 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03819578 = queryNorm
            0.34732026 = fieldWeight in 3261, product of:
              2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
                6.0 = termFreq=6.0
              3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=3261)
        0.010350002 = product of:
          0.031050006 = sum of:
            0.031050006 = weight(_text_:22 in 3261) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.031050006 = score(doc=3261,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.13375512 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.03819578 = 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)
          0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
      0.2857143 = coord(2/7)
    
    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
  8. Gödert, W.: Facets and typed relations as tools for reasoning processes in information retrieval (2014) 0.01
    0.014403056 = product of:
      0.050410695 = sum of:
        0.038226083 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 1565) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.038226083 = score(doc=1565,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.11553899 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03819578 = queryNorm
            0.33085006 = fieldWeight in 1565, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=1565)
        0.0121846115 = product of:
          0.036553834 = sum of:
            0.036553834 = weight(_text_:29 in 1565) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.036553834 = score(doc=1565,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.13436082 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.03819578 = queryNorm
                0.27205724 = fieldWeight in 1565, 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=1565)
          0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
      0.2857143 = coord(2/7)
    
    Abstract
    Faceted arrangement of entities and typed relations for representing different associations between the entities are established tools in knowledge representation. In this paper, a proposal is being discussed combining both tools to draw inferences along relational paths. This approach may yield new benefit for information retrieval processes, especially when modeled for heterogeneous environments in the Semantic Web. Faceted arrangement can be used as a selection tool for the semantic knowledge modeled within the knowledge representation. Typed relations between the entities of different facets can be used as restrictions for selecting them across the facets.
    Source
    Metadata and semantics research: 8th Research Conference, MTSR 2014, Karlsruhe, Germany, November 27-29, 2014, Proceedings. Eds.: S. Closs et al
  9. Calegari, S.; Sanchez, E.: Object-fuzzy concept network : an enrichment of ontologies in semantic information retrieval (2008) 0.01
    0.013519278 = product of:
      0.04731747 = sum of:
        0.038614176 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 2393) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.038614176 = score(doc=2393,freq=8.0), product of:
            0.11553899 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03819578 = queryNorm
            0.33420905 = fieldWeight in 2393, product of:
              2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
                8.0 = termFreq=8.0
              3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2393)
        0.008703294 = product of:
          0.026109882 = sum of:
            0.026109882 = weight(_text_:29 in 2393) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.026109882 = score(doc=2393,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.13436082 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.03819578 = queryNorm
                0.19432661 = fieldWeight in 2393, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2393)
          0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
      0.2857143 = coord(2/7)
    
    Abstract
    This article shows how a fuzzy ontology-based approach can improve semantic documents retrieval. After formally defining a fuzzy ontology and a fuzzy knowledge base, a special type of new fuzzy relationship called (semantic) correlation, which links the concepts or entities in a fuzzy ontology, is discussed. These correlations, first assigned by experts, are updated after querying or when a document has been inserted into a database. Moreover, in order to define a dynamic knowledge of a domain adapting itself to the context, it is shown how to handle a tradeoff between the correct definition of an object, taken in the ontology structure, and the actual meaning assigned by individuals. The notion of a fuzzy concept network is extended, incorporating database objects so that entities and documents can similarly be represented in the network. Information retrieval (IR) algorithm, using an object-fuzzy concept network (O-FCN), is introduced and described. This algorithm allows us to derive a unique path among the entities involved in the query to obtain maxima semantic associations in the knowledge domain. Finally, the study has been validated by querying a database using fuzzy recall, fuzzy precision, and coefficient variant measures in the crisp and fuzzy cases.
    Date
    9.11.2008 13:07:29
    Theme
    Semantisches Umfeld in Indexierung u. Retrieval
  10. Köhler, J.; Philippi, S.; Specht, M.; Rüegg, A.: Ontology based text indexing and querying for the semantic web (2006) 0.01
    0.013055672 = product of:
      0.04569485 = sum of:
        0.027304346 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 3280) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.027304346 = score(doc=3280,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.11553899 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03819578 = queryNorm
            0.23632148 = fieldWeight in 3280, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3280)
        0.018390507 = weight(_text_:internet in 3280) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.018390507 = score(doc=3280,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.11276311 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.9522398 = idf(docFreq=6276, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03819578 = queryNorm
            0.16308975 = fieldWeight in 3280, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              2.9522398 = idf(docFreq=6276, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3280)
      0.2857143 = coord(2/7)
    
    Abstract
    This publication shows how the gap between the HTML based internet and the RDF based vision of the semantic web might be bridged, by linking words in texts to concepts of ontologies. Most current search engines use indexes that are built at the syntactical level and return hits based on simple string comparisons. However, the indexes do not contain synonyms, cannot differentiate between homonyms ('mouse' as a pointing vs. 'mouse' as an animal) and users receive different search results when they use different conjugation forms of the same word. In this publication, we present a system that uses ontologies and Natural Language Processing techniques to index texts, and thus supports word sense disambiguation and the retrieval of texts that contain equivalent words, by indexing them to concepts of ontologies. For this purpose, we developed fully automated methods for mapping equivalent concepts of imported RDF ontologies (for this prototype WordNet, SUMO and OpenCyc). These methods will thus allow the seamless integration of domain specific ontologies for concept based information retrieval in different domains. To demonstrate the practical workability of this approach, a set of web pages that contain synonyms and homonyms were indexed and can be queried via a search engine like query frontend. However, the ontology based indexing approach can also be used for other data mining applications such text clustering, relation mining and for searching free text fields in biological databases. The ontology alignment methods and some of the text mining principles described in this publication are now incorporated into the ONDEX system http://ondex.sourceforge.net/.
  11. Wang, Y.-H.; Jhuo, P.-S.: ¬A semantic faceted search with rule-based inference (2009) 0.01
    0.01292489 = product of:
      0.045237113 = sum of:
        0.023168506 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 540) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.023168506 = score(doc=540,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.11553899 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03819578 = queryNorm
            0.20052543 = fieldWeight in 540, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=540)
        0.022068607 = weight(_text_:internet in 540) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.022068607 = score(doc=540,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.11276311 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.9522398 = idf(docFreq=6276, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03819578 = queryNorm
            0.1957077 = fieldWeight in 540, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              2.9522398 = idf(docFreq=6276, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=540)
      0.2857143 = coord(2/7)
    
    Abstract
    Semantic Search has become an active research of Semantic Web in recent years. The classification methodology plays a pretty critical role in the beginning of search process to disambiguate irrelevant information. However, the applications related to Folksonomy suffer from many obstacles. This study attempts to eliminate the problems resulted from Folksonomy using existing semantic technology. We also focus on how to effectively integrate heterogeneous ontologies over the Internet to acquire the integrity of domain knowledge. A faceted logic layer is abstracted in order to strengthen category framework and organize existing available ontologies according to a series of steps based on the methodology of faceted classification and ontology construction. The result showed that our approach can facilitate the integration of inconsistent or even heterogeneous ontologies. This paper also generalizes the principles of picking appropriate facets with which our facet browser completely complies so that better semantic search result can be obtained.
    Theme
    Semantisches Umfeld in Indexierung u. Retrieval
  12. Renear, A.H.; Wickett, K.M.; Urban, R.J.; Dubin, D.; Shreeves, S.L.: Collection/item metadata relationships (2008) 0.01
    0.012318635 = product of:
      0.04311522 = sum of:
        0.032765217 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 2623) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.032765217 = score(doc=2623,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.11553899 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03819578 = queryNorm
            0.2835858 = fieldWeight in 2623, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2623)
        0.010350002 = product of:
          0.031050006 = sum of:
            0.031050006 = weight(_text_:22 in 2623) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.031050006 = score(doc=2623,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.13375512 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.03819578 = 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)
          0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
      0.2857143 = coord(2/7)
    
    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. Järvelin, K.; Kristensen, J.; Niemi, T.; Sormunen, E.; Keskustalo, H.: ¬A deductive data model for query expansion (1996) 0.01
    0.012318635 = product of:
      0.04311522 = sum of:
        0.032765217 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 2230) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.032765217 = score(doc=2230,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.11553899 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03819578 = queryNorm
            0.2835858 = fieldWeight in 2230, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2230)
        0.010350002 = product of:
          0.031050006 = sum of:
            0.031050006 = weight(_text_:22 in 2230) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.031050006 = score(doc=2230,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.13375512 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.03819578 = queryNorm
                0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 2230, 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=2230)
          0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
      0.2857143 = coord(2/7)
    
    Source
    Proceedings of the 19th Annual International ACM SIGIR Conference on Research and Development in Information Retrieval (ACM SIGIR '96), Zürich, Switzerland, August 18-22, 1996. Eds.: H.P. Frei et al
    Theme
    Semantisches Umfeld in Indexierung u. Retrieval
  14. Priss, U.: Faceted information representation (2000) 0.01
    0.011172837 = product of:
      0.039104927 = sum of:
        0.027029924 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 5095) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.027029924 = score(doc=5095,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.11553899 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03819578 = queryNorm
            0.23394634 = fieldWeight in 5095, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=5095)
        0.012075002 = product of:
          0.036225006 = sum of:
            0.036225006 = weight(_text_:22 in 5095) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.036225006 = score(doc=5095,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.13375512 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.03819578 = 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)
          0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
      0.2857143 = coord(2/7)
    
    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
  15. Priss, U.: Faceted knowledge representation (1999) 0.01
    0.011172837 = product of:
      0.039104927 = sum of:
        0.027029924 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 2654) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.027029924 = score(doc=2654,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.11553899 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03819578 = queryNorm
            0.23394634 = fieldWeight in 2654, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=2654)
        0.012075002 = product of:
          0.036225006 = sum of:
            0.036225006 = weight(_text_:22 in 2654) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.036225006 = score(doc=2654,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.13375512 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.03819578 = 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)
          0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
      0.2857143 = coord(2/7)
    
    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
  16. Clark, M.; Kim, Y.; Kruschwitz, U.; Song, D.; Albakour, D.; Dignum, S.; Beresi, U.C.; Fasli, M.; Roeck, A De: Automatically structuring domain knowledge from text : an overview of current research (2012) 0.01
    0.010839568 = product of:
      0.037938487 = sum of:
        0.023168506 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 2738) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.023168506 = score(doc=2738,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.11553899 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03819578 = queryNorm
            0.20052543 = fieldWeight in 2738, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2738)
        0.014769981 = product of:
          0.04430994 = sum of:
            0.04430994 = weight(_text_:29 in 2738) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.04430994 = score(doc=2738,freq=4.0), product of:
                0.13436082 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.03819578 = queryNorm
                0.3297832 = fieldWeight in 2738, product of:
                  2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                    4.0 = termFreq=4.0
                  3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2738)
          0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
      0.2857143 = coord(2/7)
    
    Abstract
    This paper presents an overview of automatic methods for building domain knowledge structures (domain models) from text collections. Applications of domain models have a long history within knowledge engineering and artificial intelligence. In the last couple of decades they have surfaced noticeably as a useful tool within natural language processing, information retrieval and semantic web technology. Inspired by the ubiquitous propagation of domain model structures that are emerging in several research disciplines, we give an overview of the current research landscape and some techniques and approaches. We will also discuss trade-offs between different approaches and point to some recent trends.
    Date
    29. 1.2016 18:29:51
  17. Si, L.; Zhou, J.: Ontology and linked data of Chinese great sites information resources from users' perspective (2022) 0.01
    0.010770742 = product of:
      0.037697595 = sum of:
        0.019307088 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 1115) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.019307088 = score(doc=1115,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.11553899 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03819578 = queryNorm
            0.16710453 = fieldWeight in 1115, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1115)
        0.018390507 = weight(_text_:internet in 1115) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.018390507 = score(doc=1115,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.11276311 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.9522398 = idf(docFreq=6276, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03819578 = queryNorm
            0.16308975 = fieldWeight in 1115, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              2.9522398 = idf(docFreq=6276, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1115)
      0.2857143 = coord(2/7)
    
    Abstract
    Great Sites are closely related to the residents' life, urban and rural development. In the process of rapid urbanization in China, the protection and utilization of Great Sites are facing unprecedented pressure. Effective knowl­edge organization with ontology and linked data of Great Sites is a prerequisite for their protection and utilization. In this paper, an interview is conducted to understand the users' awareness towards Great Sites to build the user-centered ontology. As for designing the Great Site ontology, firstly, the scope of Great Sites is determined. Secondly, CIDOC- CRM and OWL-Time Ontology are reused combining the results of literature research and user interviews. Thirdly, the top-level structure and the specific instances are determined to extract knowl­edge concepts of Great Sites. Fourthly, they are transformed into classes, data properties and object properties of the Great Site ontology. Later, based on the linked data technology, taking the Great Sites in Xi'an Area as an example, this paper uses D2RQ to publish the linked data set of the knowl­edge of the Great Sites and realize its opening and sharing. Semantic services such as semantic annotation, semantic retrieval and reasoning are provided based on the ontology.
    Theme
    Internet
  18. Gödert, W.: ¬An ontology-based model for indexing and retrieval (2013) 0.01
    0.009867877 = product of:
      0.06907514 = sum of:
        0.06907514 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 1510) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.06907514 = score(doc=1510,freq=10.0), product of:
            0.11553899 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03819578 = queryNorm
            0.59785134 = fieldWeight in 1510, product of:
              3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
                10.0 = termFreq=10.0
              3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=1510)
      0.14285715 = coord(1/7)
    
    Abstract
    Starting from an unsolved problem of information retrieval this paper presents an ontology-based model for indexing and retrieval. The model combines the methods and experiences of cognitive-to-interpret indexing languages with the strengths and possibilities of formal knowledge representation. The core component of the model uses inferences along the paths of typed relations between the entities of a knowledge representation for enabling the determination of hit quantities in the context of retrieval processes. The entities are arranged in aspect-oriented facets to ensure a consistent hierarchical structure. The possible consequences for indexing and retrieval are discussed.
  19. Priss, U.: Description logic and faceted knowledge representation (1999) 0.01
    0.009576717 = product of:
      0.033518508 = sum of:
        0.023168506 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 2655) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.023168506 = score(doc=2655,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.11553899 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03819578 = queryNorm
            0.20052543 = fieldWeight in 2655, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2655)
        0.010350002 = product of:
          0.031050006 = sum of:
            0.031050006 = weight(_text_:22 in 2655) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.031050006 = score(doc=2655,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.13375512 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.03819578 = queryNorm
                0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 2655, 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=2655)
          0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
      0.2857143 = coord(2/7)
    
    Abstract
    The term "facet" was introduced into the field of library classification systems by Ranganathan in the 1930's [Ranganathan, 1962]. A facet is a viewpoint or aspect. In contrast to traditional classification systems, faceted systems are modular in that a domain is analyzed in terms of baseline facets which are then synthesized. In this paper, the term "facet" is used in a broader meaning. Facets can describe different aspects on the same level of abstraction or the same aspect on different levels of abstraction. The notion of facets is related to database views, multicontexts and conceptual scaling in formal concept analysis [Ganter and Wille, 1999], polymorphism in object-oriented design, aspect-oriented programming, views and contexts in description logic and semantic networks. This paper presents a definition of facets in terms of faceted knowledge representation that incorporates the traditional narrower notion of facets and potentially facilitates translation between different knowledge representation formalisms. A goal of this approach is a modular, machine-aided knowledge base design mechanism. A possible application is faceted thesaurus construction for information retrieval and data mining. Reasoning complexity depends on the size of the modules (facets). A more general analysis of complexity will be left for future research.
    Date
    22. 1.2016 17:30:31
  20. Aitken, S.; Reid, S.: Evaluation of an ontology-based information retrieval tool (2000) 0.01
    0.008826098 = product of:
      0.061782684 = sum of:
        0.061782684 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 2862) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.061782684 = score(doc=2862,freq=8.0), product of:
            0.11553899 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03819578 = queryNorm
            0.5347345 = fieldWeight in 2862, product of:
              2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
                8.0 = termFreq=8.0
              3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=2862)
      0.14285715 = coord(1/7)
    
    Abstract
    This paper evaluates the use of an explicit domain ontology in an information retrieval tool. The evaluation compares the performance of ontology-enhanced retrieval with keyword retrieval for a fixed set of queries across several data sets. The robustness of the IR approach is assessed by comparing the performance of the tool on the original data set with that on previously unseen data.

Authors

Years

Types

  • el 33
  • x 1
  • More… Less…