Search (25 results, page 1 of 2)

  • × language_ss:"e"
  • × theme_ss:"Wissensrepräsentation"
  • × type_ss:"el"
  • × year_i:[2010 TO 2020}
  1. Bandholtz, T.; Schulte-Coerne, T.; Glaser, R.; Fock, J.; Keller, T.: iQvoc - open source SKOS(XL) maintenance and publishing tool (2010) 0.00
    0.0019283318 = product of:
      0.014462488 = sum of:
        0.011009198 = weight(_text_:und in 604) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.011009198 = score(doc=604,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.06422601 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
              0.028978055 = 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)
        0.00345329 = product of:
          0.00690658 = sum of:
            0.00690658 = weight(_text_:information in 604) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.00690658 = score(doc=604,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.050870337 = queryWeight, product of:
                  1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.028978055 = 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)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.13333334 = coord(2/15)
    
    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
  2. Assem, M. van: Converting and integrating vocabularies for the Semantic Web (2010) 0.00
    0.001101904 = product of:
      0.008264279 = sum of:
        0.0062909704 = weight(_text_:und in 4639) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.0062909704 = score(doc=4639,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.06422601 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
              0.028978055 = queryNorm
            0.09795051 = fieldWeight in 4639, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=4639)
        0.0019733086 = product of:
          0.0039466172 = sum of:
            0.0039466172 = weight(_text_:information in 4639) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.0039466172 = score(doc=4639,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.050870337 = queryWeight, product of:
                  1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.028978055 = queryNorm
                0.0775819 = fieldWeight in 4639, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=4639)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.13333334 = coord(2/15)
    
    Abstract
    We refine the problem statement into three research questions. The first two focus on the problem of conversion of a vocabulary to a Semantic Web representation from its original format. Conversion of a vocabulary to a representation in a Semantic Web language is necessary to make the vocabulary available to SemanticWeb applications. In the last question we focus on integration of collection metadata schemas in a way that allows for vocabulary representations as produced by our methods. Academisch proefschrift ter verkrijging van de graad Doctor aan de Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Dutch Research School for Information and Knowledge Systems.
    Theme
    Konzeption und Anwendung des Prinzips Thesaurus
  3. Hollink, L.; Assem, M. van: Estimating the relevance of search results in the Culture-Web : a study of semantic distance measures (2010) 0.00
    7.852253E-4 = product of:
      0.011778379 = sum of:
        0.011778379 = product of:
          0.023556758 = sum of:
            0.023556758 = weight(_text_:22 in 4649) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.023556758 = score(doc=4649,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.101476215 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.028978055 = queryNorm
                0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 4649, 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=4649)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.06666667 = coord(1/15)
    
    Date
    26.12.2011 13:40:22
  4. Monireh, E.; Sarker, M.K.; Bianchi, F.; Hitzler, P.; Doran, D.; Xie, N.: Reasoning over RDF knowledge bases using deep learning (2018) 0.00
    6.5435446E-4 = product of:
      0.009815317 = sum of:
        0.009815317 = product of:
          0.019630633 = sum of:
            0.019630633 = weight(_text_:22 in 4553) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.019630633 = score(doc=4553,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.101476215 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.028978055 = queryNorm
                0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 4553, 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=4553)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.06666667 = coord(1/15)
    
    Date
    16.11.2018 14:22:01
  5. Kara, S.: ¬An ontology-based retrieval system using semantic indexing (2012) 0.00
    3.9466174E-4 = product of:
      0.005919926 = sum of:
        0.005919926 = product of:
          0.011839852 = sum of:
            0.011839852 = weight(_text_:information in 3829) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.011839852 = score(doc=3829,freq=8.0), product of:
                0.050870337 = queryWeight, product of:
                  1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.028978055 = queryNorm
                0.23274569 = fieldWeight in 3829, 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=3829)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.06666667 = coord(1/15)
    
    Abstract
    In this thesis, we present an ontology-based information extraction and retrieval system and its application to soccer domain. In general, we deal with three issues in semantic search, namely, usability, scalability and retrieval performance. We propose a keyword-based semantic retrieval approach. The performance of the system is improved considerably using domain-specific information extraction, inference and rules. Scalability is achieved by adapting a semantic indexing approach. The system is implemented using the state-of-the-art technologies in SemanticWeb and its performance is evaluated against traditional systems as well as the query expansion methods. Furthermore, a detailed evaluation is provided to observe the performance gain due to domain-specific information extraction and inference. Finally, we show how we use semantic indexing to solve simple structural ambiguities.
    Source
    Information Systems. 37(2012) no. 4, S.294-305
  6. Wong, W.; Liu, W.; Bennamoun, M.: Ontology learning from text : a look back and into the future (2010) 0.00
    3.255793E-4 = product of:
      0.0048836893 = sum of:
        0.0048836893 = product of:
          0.009767379 = sum of:
            0.009767379 = weight(_text_:information in 4733) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.009767379 = score(doc=4733,freq=4.0), product of:
                0.050870337 = queryWeight, product of:
                  1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.028978055 = queryNorm
                0.1920054 = fieldWeight in 4733, 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=4733)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.06666667 = coord(1/15)
    
    Abstract
    Ontologies are often viewed as the answer to the need for inter-operable semantics in modern information systems. The explosion of textual information on the "Read/Write" Web coupled with the increasing demand for ontologies to power the Semantic Web have made (semi-)automatic ontology learning from text a very promising research area. This together with the advanced state in related areas such as natural language processing have fuelled research into ontology learning over the past decade. This survey looks at how far we have come since the turn of the millennium, and discusses the remaining challenges that will define the research directions in this area in the near future.
  7. Gödert, W.: Facets and typed relations as tools for reasoning processes in information retrieval (2014) 0.00
    3.255793E-4 = product of:
      0.0048836893 = sum of:
        0.0048836893 = product of:
          0.009767379 = sum of:
            0.009767379 = weight(_text_:information in 3816) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.009767379 = score(doc=3816,freq=4.0), product of:
                0.050870337 = queryWeight, product of:
                  1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.028978055 = queryNorm
                0.1920054 = fieldWeight in 3816, 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=3816)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.06666667 = coord(1/15)
    
    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.
  8. Sy, M.-F.; Ranwez, S.; Montmain, J.; Ragnault, A.; Crampes, M.; Ranwez, V.: User centered and ontology based information retrieval system for life sciences (2012) 0.00
    3.2223997E-4 = product of:
      0.004833599 = sum of:
        0.004833599 = product of:
          0.009667198 = sum of:
            0.009667198 = weight(_text_:information in 699) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.009667198 = score(doc=699,freq=12.0), product of:
                0.050870337 = queryWeight, product of:
                  1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.028978055 = queryNorm
                0.19003606 = fieldWeight in 699, product of:
                  3.4641016 = tf(freq=12.0), with freq of:
                    12.0 = termFreq=12.0
                  1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=699)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.06666667 = coord(1/15)
    
    Abstract
    Background: Because of the increasing number of electronic resources, designing efficient tools to retrieve and exploit them is a major challenge. Some improvements have been offered by semantic Web technologies and applications based on domain ontologies. In life science, for instance, the Gene Ontology is widely exploited in genomic applications and the Medical Subject Headings is the basis of biomedical publications indexation and information retrieval process proposed by PubMed. However current search engines suffer from two main drawbacks: there is limited user interaction with the list of retrieved resources and no explanation for their adequacy to the query is provided. Users may thus be confused by the selection and have no idea on how to adapt their queries so that the results match their expectations. Results: This paper describes an information retrieval system that relies on domain ontology to widen the set of relevant documents that is retrieved and that uses a graphical rendering of query results to favor user interactions. Semantic proximities between ontology concepts and aggregating models are used to assess documents adequacy with respect to a query. The selection of documents is displayed in a semantic map to provide graphical indications that make explicit to what extent they match the user's query; this man/machine interface favors a more interactive and iterative exploration of data corpus, by facilitating query concepts weighting and visual explanation. We illustrate the benefit of using this information retrieval system on two case studies one of which aiming at collecting human genes related to transcription factors involved in hemopoiesis pathway. Conclusions: The ontology based information retrieval system described in this paper (OBIRS) is freely available at: http://www.ontotoolkit.mines-ales.fr/ObirsClient/. This environment is a first step towards a user centred application in which the system enlightens relevant information to provide decision help.
  9. Rajasurya, S.; Muralidharan, T.; Devi, S.; Swamynathan, S.: Semantic information retrieval using ontology in university domain (2012) 0.00
    2.848226E-4 = product of:
      0.004272339 = sum of:
        0.004272339 = product of:
          0.008544678 = sum of:
            0.008544678 = weight(_text_:information in 2861) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.008544678 = score(doc=2861,freq=6.0), product of:
                0.050870337 = queryWeight, product of:
                  1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.028978055 = queryNorm
                0.16796975 = fieldWeight in 2861, 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=2861)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.06666667 = coord(1/15)
    
    Abstract
    Today's conventional search engines hardly do provide the essential content relevant to the user's search query. This is because the context and semantics of the request made by the user is not analyzed to the full extent. So here the need for a semantic web search arises. SWS is upcoming in the area of web search which combines Natural Language Processing and Artificial Intelligence. The objective of the work done here is to design, develop and implement a semantic search engine- SIEU(Semantic Information Extraction in University Domain) confined to the university domain. SIEU uses ontology as a knowledge base for the information retrieval process. It is not just a mere keyword search. It is one layer above what Google or any other search engines retrieve by analyzing just the keywords. Here the query is analyzed both syntactically and semantically. The developed system retrieves the web results more relevant to the user query through keyword expansion. The results obtained here will be accurate enough to satisfy the request made by the user. The level of accuracy will be enhanced since the query is analyzed semantically. The system will be of great use to the developers and researchers who work on web. The Google results are re-ranked and optimized for providing the relevant links. For ranking an algorithm has been applied which fetches more apt results for the user query.
  10. Gómez-Pérez, A.; Corcho, O.: Ontology languages for the Semantic Web (2015) 0.00
    2.848226E-4 = product of:
      0.004272339 = sum of:
        0.004272339 = product of:
          0.008544678 = sum of:
            0.008544678 = weight(_text_:information in 3297) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.008544678 = score(doc=3297,freq=6.0), product of:
                0.050870337 = queryWeight, product of:
                  1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.028978055 = queryNorm
                0.16796975 = fieldWeight in 3297, 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=3297)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.06666667 = coord(1/15)
    
    Abstract
    Ontologies have proven to be an essential element in many applications. They are used in agent systems, knowledge management systems, and e-commerce platforms. They can also generate natural language, integrate intelligent information, provide semantic-based access to the Internet, and extract information from texts in addition to being used in many other applications to explicitly declare the knowledge embedded in them. However, not only are ontologies useful for applications in which knowledge plays a key role, but they can also trigger a major change in current Web contents. This change is leading to the third generation of the Web-known as the Semantic Web-which has been defined as "the conceptual structuring of the Web in an explicit machine-readable way."1 This definition does not differ too much from the one used for defining an ontology: "An ontology is an explicit, machinereadable specification of a shared conceptualization."2 In fact, new ontology-based applications and knowledge architectures are developing for this new Web. A common claim for all of these approaches is the need for languages to represent the semantic information that this Web requires-solving the heterogeneous data exchange in this heterogeneous environment. Here, we don't decide which language is best of the Semantic Web. Rather, our goal is to help developers find the most suitable language for their representation needs. The authors analyze the most representative ontology languages created for the Web and compare them using a common framework.
  11. Mäkelä, E.; Hyvönen, E.; Saarela, S.; Vilfanen, K.: Application of ontology techniques to view-based semantic serach and browsing (2012) 0.00
    2.79068E-4 = product of:
      0.0041860198 = sum of:
        0.0041860198 = product of:
          0.0083720395 = sum of:
            0.0083720395 = weight(_text_:information in 3264) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.0083720395 = score(doc=3264,freq=4.0), product of:
                0.050870337 = queryWeight, product of:
                  1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.028978055 = queryNorm
                0.16457605 = fieldWeight in 3264, 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=3264)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.06666667 = coord(1/15)
    
    Abstract
    We scho how the beenfits of the view-based search method, developed within the information retrieval community, can be extended with ontology-based search, developed within the Semantic Web community, and with semantic recommendations. As a proof of the concept, we have implemented an ontology-and view-based search engine and recommendations system Ontogaotr for RDF(S) repositories. Ontogator is innovative in two ways. Firstly, the RDFS.based ontologies used for annotating metadata are used in the user interface to facilitate view-based information retrieval. The views provide the user with an overview of the repositorys contents and a vocabulary for expressing search queries. Secondlyy, a semantic browsing function is provided by a recommender system. This system enriches instance level metadata by ontologies and provides the user with links to semantically related relevant resources. The semantic linkage is specified in terms of logical rules. To illustrate and discuss the ideas, a deployed application of Ontogator to a photo repository of the Helsinki University Museum is presented.
  12. Gödert, W.: ¬An ontology-based model for indexing and retrieval (2013) 0.00
    2.6310782E-4 = product of:
      0.0039466172 = sum of:
        0.0039466172 = product of:
          0.0078932345 = sum of:
            0.0078932345 = weight(_text_:information in 1510) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.0078932345 = score(doc=1510,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.050870337 = queryWeight, product of:
                  1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.028978055 = queryNorm
                0.1551638 = fieldWeight in 1510, 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=1510)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.06666667 = coord(1/15)
    
    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.
  13. Cumyn, M.; Reiner, G.; Mas, S.; Lesieur, D.: Legal knowledge representation using a faceted scheme (2019) 0.00
    2.6310782E-4 = product of:
      0.0039466172 = sum of:
        0.0039466172 = product of:
          0.0078932345 = sum of:
            0.0078932345 = weight(_text_:information in 5788) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.0078932345 = score(doc=5788,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.050870337 = queryWeight, product of:
                  1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.028978055 = queryNorm
                0.1551638 = fieldWeight in 5788, 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=5788)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.06666667 = coord(1/15)
    
    Abstract
    A database supports legal research by matching a user's request for information with documents of the database that contain it. Indexes are among the oldest tools to achieve that aim. Many legal publishers continue to provide manual subject indexing of legal documents, in addition to automatic full-text indexing, which improves the performance of a full-text search.
  14. Smith, D.A.; Shadbolt, N.R.: FacetOntology : expressive descriptions of facets in the Semantic Web (2012) 0.00
    2.3255666E-4 = product of:
      0.0034883497 = sum of:
        0.0034883497 = product of:
          0.0069766995 = sum of:
            0.0069766995 = weight(_text_:information in 2208) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.0069766995 = score(doc=2208,freq=4.0), product of:
                0.050870337 = queryWeight, product of:
                  1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.028978055 = queryNorm
                0.13714671 = fieldWeight in 2208, product of:
                  2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                    4.0 = termFreq=4.0
                  1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2208)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.06666667 = coord(1/15)
    
    Abstract
    The formal structure of the information on the Semantic Web lends itself to faceted browsing, an information retrieval method where users can filter results based on the values of properties ("facets"). Numerous faceted browsers have been created to browse RDF and Linked Data, but these systems use their own ontologies for defining how data is queried to populate their facets. Since the source data is the same format across these systems (specifically, RDF), we can unify the different methods of describing how to quer the underlying data, to enable compatibility across systems, and provide an extensible base ontology for future systems. To this end, we present FacetOntology, an ontology that defines how to query data to form a faceted browser, and a number of transformations and filters that can be applied to data before it is shown to users. FacetOntology overcomes limitations in the expressivity of existing work, by enabling the full expressivity of SPARQL when selecting data for facets. By applying a FacetOntology definition to data, a set of facets are specified, each with queries and filters to source RDF data, which enables faceted browsing systems to be created using that RDF data.
  15. Xu, G.; Cao, Y.; Ren, Y.; Li, X.; Feng, Z.: Network security situation awareness based on semantic ontology and user-defined rules for Internet of Things (2017) 0.00
    2.3255666E-4 = product of:
      0.0034883497 = sum of:
        0.0034883497 = product of:
          0.0069766995 = sum of:
            0.0069766995 = weight(_text_:information in 306) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.0069766995 = score(doc=306,freq=4.0), product of:
                0.050870337 = queryWeight, product of:
                  1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.028978055 = queryNorm
                0.13714671 = fieldWeight in 306, product of:
                  2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                    4.0 = termFreq=4.0
                  1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=306)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.06666667 = coord(1/15)
    
    Abstract
    Internet of Things (IoT) brings the third development wave of the global information industry which makes users, network and perception devices cooperate more closely. However, if IoT has security problems, it may cause a variety of damage and even threaten human lives and properties. To improve the abilities of monitoring, providing emergency response and predicting the development trend of IoT security, a new paradigm called network security situation awareness (NSSA) is proposed. However, it is limited by its ability to mine and evaluate security situation elements from multi-source heterogeneous network security information. To solve this problem, this paper proposes an IoT network security situation awareness model using situation reasoning method based on semantic ontology and user-defined rules. Ontology technology can provide a unified and formalized description to solve the problem of semantic heterogeneity in the IoT security domain. In this paper, four key sub-domains are proposed to reflect an IoT security situation: context, attack, vulnerability and network flow. Further, user-defined rules can compensate for the limited description ability of ontology, and hence can enhance the reasoning ability of our proposed ontology model. The examples in real IoT scenarios show that the ability of the network security situation awareness that adopts our situation reasoning method is more comprehensive and more powerful reasoning abilities than the traditional NSSA methods. [http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/abstract/document/7999187/]
  16. Mirizzi, R.: Exploratory browsing in the Web of Data (2011) 0.00
    2.3021935E-4 = product of:
      0.00345329 = sum of:
        0.00345329 = product of:
          0.00690658 = sum of:
            0.00690658 = weight(_text_:information in 4803) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.00690658 = score(doc=4803,freq=8.0), product of:
                0.050870337 = queryWeight, product of:
                  1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.028978055 = queryNorm
                0.13576832 = fieldWeight in 4803, product of:
                  2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
                    8.0 = termFreq=8.0
                  1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.02734375 = fieldNorm(doc=4803)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.06666667 = coord(1/15)
    
    Abstract
    Thanks to the recent Linked Data initiative, the foundations of the Semantic Web have been built. Shared, open and linked RDF datasets give us the possibility to exploit both the strong theoretical results and the robust technologies and tools developed since the seminal paper in the Semantic Web appeared in 2001. In a simplistic way, we may think at the Semantic Web as a ultra large distributed database we can query to get information coming from different sources. In fact, every dataset exposes a SPARQL endpoint to make the data accessible through exact queries. If we know the URI of the famous actress Nicole Kidman in DBpedia we may retrieve all the movies she acted with a simple SPARQL query. Eventually we may aggregate this information with users ratings and genres from IMDB. Even though these are very exciting results and applications, there is much more behind the curtains. Datasets come with the description of their schema structured in an ontological way. Resources refer to classes which are in turn organized in well structured and rich ontologies. Exploiting also this further feature we go beyond the notion of a distributed database and we can refer to the Semantic Web as a distributed knowledge base. If in our knowledge base we have that Paris is located in France (ontological level) and that Moulin Rouge! is set in Paris (data level) we may query the Semantic Web (interpreted as a set of interconnected datasets and related ontologies) to return all the movies starred by Nicole Kidman set in France and Moulin Rouge! will be in the final result set. The ontological level makes possible to infer new relations among data.
    The Linked Data initiative and the state of the art in semantic technologies led off all brand new search and mash-up applications. The basic idea is to have smarter lookup services for a huge, distributed and social knowledge base. All these applications catch and (re)propose, under a semantic data perspective, the view of the classical Web as a distributed collection of documents to retrieve. The interlinked nature of the Web, and consequently of the Semantic Web, is exploited (just) to collect and aggregate data coming from different sources. Of course, this is a big step forward in search and Web technologies, but if we limit our investi- gation to retrieval tasks, we miss another important feature of the current Web: browsing and in particular exploratory browsing (a.k.a. exploratory search). Thanks to its hyperlinked nature, the Web defined a new way of browsing documents and knowledge: selection by lookup, navigation and trial-and-error tactics were, and still are, exploited by users to search for relevant information satisfying some initial requirements. The basic assumptions behind a lookup search, typical of Information Retrieval (IR) systems, are no more valid in an exploratory browsing context. An IR system, such as a search engine, assumes that: the user has a clear picture of what she is looking for ; she knows the terminology of the specific knowledge space. On the other side, as argued in, the main challenges in exploratory search can be summarized as: support querying and rapid query refinement; other facets and metadata-based result filtering; leverage search context; support learning and understanding; other visualization to support insight/decision making; facilitate collaboration. In Section 3 we will show two applications for exploratory search in the Semantic Web addressing some of the above challenges.
  17. Shen, M.; Liu, D.-R.; Huang, Y.-S.: Extracting semantic relations to enrich domain ontologies (2012) 0.00
    2.3021935E-4 = product of:
      0.00345329 = sum of:
        0.00345329 = product of:
          0.00690658 = sum of:
            0.00690658 = weight(_text_:information in 267) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.00690658 = score(doc=267,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.050870337 = queryWeight, product of:
                  1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.028978055 = queryNorm
                0.13576832 = fieldWeight in 267, 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=267)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.06666667 = coord(1/15)
    
    Source
    Journal of Intelligent Information Systems
  18. Advances in ontologies : Proceedings of the Sixth Australasian Ontology Workshop Adelaide, Australia, 7 December 2010 (2010) 0.00
    1.9733087E-4 = product of:
      0.002959963 = sum of:
        0.002959963 = product of:
          0.005919926 = sum of:
            0.005919926 = weight(_text_:information in 4420) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.005919926 = score(doc=4420,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.050870337 = queryWeight, product of:
                  1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.028978055 = queryNorm
                0.116372846 = fieldWeight in 4420, 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=4420)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.06666667 = coord(1/15)
    
    Footnote
    Preprint. To be published as Vol 122 in the Conferences in Research and Practice in Information Technology Series by the Australian Computer Society Inc. http://crpit.com/.
  19. Menzel, C.: Knowledge representation, the World Wide Web, and the evolution of logic (2011) 0.00
    1.9733087E-4 = product of:
      0.002959963 = sum of:
        0.002959963 = product of:
          0.005919926 = sum of:
            0.005919926 = weight(_text_:information in 761) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.005919926 = score(doc=761,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.050870337 = queryWeight, product of:
                  1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.028978055 = queryNorm
                0.116372846 = fieldWeight in 761, 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=761)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.06666667 = coord(1/15)
    
    Abstract
    In this paper, I have traced a series of evolutionary adaptations of FOL motivated entirely by its use by knowledge engineers to represent and share information on the Web culminating in the development of Common Logic. While the primary goal in this paper has been to document this evolution, it is arguable, I think that CL's syntactic and semantic egalitarianism better realizes the goal "topic neutrality" that a logic should ideally exemplify - understood, at least in part, as the idea that logic should as far as possible not itself embody any metaphysical presuppositions. Instead of retaining the traditional metaphysical divisions of FOL that reflect its Fregean origins, CL begins as it were with a single, metaphysically homogeneous domain in which, potentially, anything can play the traditional roles of object, property, relation, and function. Note that the effect of this is not to destroy traditional metaphysical divisions. Rather, it simply to refrain from building those divisions explicitly into one's logic; instead, such divisions are left to the user to introduce and enforce axiomatically in an explicit metaphysical theory.
  20. Gayathri, R.; Uma, V.: Ontology based knowledge representation technique, domain modeling languages and planners for robotic path planning : a survey (2018) 0.00
    1.9733087E-4 = product of:
      0.002959963 = sum of:
        0.002959963 = product of:
          0.005919926 = sum of:
            0.005919926 = weight(_text_:information in 5605) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.005919926 = score(doc=5605,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.050870337 = queryWeight, product of:
                  1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.028978055 = queryNorm
                0.116372846 = fieldWeight in 5605, 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=5605)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.06666667 = coord(1/15)
    
    Abstract
    Knowledge Representation and Reasoning (KR & R) has become one of the promising fields of Artificial Intelligence. KR is dedicated towards representing information about the domain that can be utilized in path planning. Ontology based knowledge representation and reasoning techniques provide sophisticated knowledge about the environment for processing tasks or methods. Ontology helps in representing the knowledge about environment, events and actions that help in path planning and making robots more autonomous. Knowledge reasoning techniques can infer new conclusion and thus aids planning dynamically in a non-deterministic environment. In the initial sections, the representation of knowledge using ontology and the techniques for reasoning that could contribute in path planning are discussed in detail. In the following section, we also provide comparison of various planning domain modeling languages, ontology editors, planners and robot simulation tools.