Search (94 results, page 1 of 5)

  • × language_ss:"e"
  • × theme_ss:"Wissensrepräsentation"
  • × type_ss:"el"
  1. Halpin, H.; Hayes, P.J.: When owl:sameAs isn't the same : an analysis of identity links on the Semantic Web (2010) 0.03
    0.033071604 = product of:
      0.1157506 = sum of:
        0.08978786 = weight(_text_:interactions in 4834) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.08978786 = score(doc=4834,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.22965278 = queryWeight, product of:
              5.8977947 = idf(docFreq=329, maxDocs=44218)
              0.038938753 = queryNorm
            0.39097226 = fieldWeight in 4834, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              5.8977947 = idf(docFreq=329, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4834)
        0.025962738 = weight(_text_:with in 4834) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.025962738 = score(doc=4834,freq=6.0), product of:
            0.09383348 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.409771 = idf(docFreq=10797, maxDocs=44218)
              0.038938753 = queryNorm
            0.2766895 = fieldWeight in 4834, product of:
              2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
                6.0 = termFreq=6.0
              2.409771 = idf(docFreq=10797, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4834)
      0.2857143 = coord(2/7)
    
    Abstract
    In Linked Data, the use of owl:sameAs is ubiquitous in 'inter-linking' data-sets. However, there is a lurking suspicion within the Linked Data community that this use of owl:sameAs may be somehow incorrect, in particular with regards to its interactions with inference. In fact, owl:sameAs can be considered just one type of 'identity link', a link that declares two items to be identical in some fashion. After reviewing the definitions and history of the problem of identity in philosophy and knowledge representation, we outline four alternative readings of owl:sameAs, showing with examples how it is being (ab)used on the Web of data. Then we present possible solutions to this problem by introducing alternative identity links that rely on named graphs.
  2. Halpin, H.; Hayes, P.J.; McCusker, J.P.; McGuinness, D.L.; Thompson, H.S.: When owl:sameAs isn't the same : an analysis of identity in linked data (2010) 0.03
    0.031710386 = product of:
      0.11098635 = sum of:
        0.08978786 = weight(_text_:interactions in 4703) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.08978786 = score(doc=4703,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.22965278 = queryWeight, product of:
              5.8977947 = idf(docFreq=329, maxDocs=44218)
              0.038938753 = queryNorm
            0.39097226 = fieldWeight in 4703, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              5.8977947 = idf(docFreq=329, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4703)
        0.021198487 = weight(_text_:with in 4703) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.021198487 = score(doc=4703,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.09383348 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.409771 = idf(docFreq=10797, maxDocs=44218)
              0.038938753 = queryNorm
            0.22591603 = fieldWeight in 4703, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              2.409771 = idf(docFreq=10797, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4703)
      0.2857143 = coord(2/7)
    
    Abstract
    In Linked Data, the use of owl:sameAs is ubiquitous in interlinking data-sets. There is however, ongoing discussion about its use, and potential misuse, particularly with regards to interactions with inference. In fact, owl:sameAs can be viewed as encoding only one point on a scale of similarity, one that is often too strong for many of its current uses. We describe how referentially opaque contexts that do not allow inference exist, and then outline some varieties of referentially-opaque alternatives to owl:sameAs. Finally, we report on an empirical experiment over randomly selected owl:sameAs statements from the Web of data. This theoretical apparatus and experiment shed light upon how owl:sameAs is being used (and misused) on the Web of data.
  3. Griffiths, T.L.; Steyvers, M.: ¬A probabilistic approach to semantic representation (2002) 0.03
    0.030465176 = product of:
      0.10662811 = sum of:
        0.02826465 = weight(_text_:with in 3671) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.02826465 = score(doc=3671,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.09383348 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.409771 = idf(docFreq=10797, maxDocs=44218)
              0.038938753 = queryNorm
            0.30122137 = fieldWeight in 3671, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              2.409771 = idf(docFreq=10797, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=3671)
        0.07836346 = product of:
          0.15672693 = sum of:
            0.15672693 = weight(_text_:humans in 3671) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.15672693 = score(doc=3671,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.26276368 = queryWeight, product of:
                  6.7481275 = idf(docFreq=140, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.038938753 = queryNorm
                0.5964558 = fieldWeight in 3671, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  6.7481275 = idf(docFreq=140, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=3671)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.2857143 = coord(2/7)
    
    Abstract
    Semantic networks produced from human data have statistical properties that cannot be easily captured by spatial representations. We explore a probabilistic approach to semantic representation that explicitly models the probability with which words occurin diffrent contexts, and hence captures the probabilistic relationships between words. We show that this representation has statistical properties consistent with the large-scale structure of semantic networks constructed by humans, and trace the origins of these properties.
  4. Giunchiglia, F.; Zaihrayeu, I.; Farazi, F.: Converting classifications into OWL ontologies (2009) 0.03
    0.029804429 = product of:
      0.1043155 = sum of:
        0.021198487 = weight(_text_:with in 4690) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.021198487 = score(doc=4690,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.09383348 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.409771 = idf(docFreq=10797, maxDocs=44218)
              0.038938753 = queryNorm
            0.22591603 = fieldWeight in 4690, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              2.409771 = idf(docFreq=10797, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4690)
        0.08311701 = product of:
          0.16623402 = sum of:
            0.16623402 = weight(_text_:humans in 4690) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.16623402 = score(doc=4690,freq=4.0), product of:
                0.26276368 = queryWeight, product of:
                  6.7481275 = idf(docFreq=140, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.038938753 = queryNorm
                0.63263696 = fieldWeight in 4690, product of:
                  2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                    4.0 = termFreq=4.0
                  6.7481275 = idf(docFreq=140, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4690)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.2857143 = coord(2/7)
    
    Abstract
    Classification schemes, such as the DMoZ web directory, provide a convenient and intuitive way for humans to access classified contents. While being easy to be dealt with for humans, classification schemes remain hard to be reasoned about by automated software agents. Among other things, this hardness is conditioned by the ambiguous na- ture of the natural language used to describe classification categories. In this paper we describe how classification schemes can be converted into OWL ontologies, thus enabling reasoning on them by Semantic Web applications. The proposed solution is based on a two phase approach in which category names are first encoded in a concept language and then, together with the structure of the classification scheme, are converted into an OWL ontology. We demonstrate the practical applicability of our approach by showing how the results of reasoning on these OWL ontologies can help improve the organization and use of web directories.
  5. 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) 0.02
    0.021140257 = product of:
      0.0739909 = sum of:
        0.059858575 = weight(_text_:interactions in 699) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.059858575 = score(doc=699,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.22965278 = queryWeight, product of:
              5.8977947 = idf(docFreq=329, maxDocs=44218)
              0.038938753 = queryNorm
            0.26064816 = fieldWeight in 699, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              5.8977947 = idf(docFreq=329, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=699)
        0.014132325 = weight(_text_:with in 699) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.014132325 = score(doc=699,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.09383348 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.409771 = idf(docFreq=10797, maxDocs=44218)
              0.038938753 = queryNorm
            0.15061069 = fieldWeight in 699, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              2.409771 = idf(docFreq=10797, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=699)
      0.2857143 = coord(2/7)
    
    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.
  6. OWL Web Ontology Language Overview (2004) 0.02
    0.021074913 = product of:
      0.07376219 = sum of:
        0.014989593 = weight(_text_:with in 4682) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.014989593 = score(doc=4682,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.09383348 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.409771 = idf(docFreq=10797, maxDocs=44218)
              0.038938753 = queryNorm
            0.15974675 = fieldWeight in 4682, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              2.409771 = idf(docFreq=10797, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4682)
        0.058772597 = product of:
          0.117545195 = sum of:
            0.117545195 = weight(_text_:humans in 4682) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.117545195 = score(doc=4682,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.26276368 = queryWeight, product of:
                  6.7481275 = idf(docFreq=140, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.038938753 = queryNorm
                0.44734186 = fieldWeight in 4682, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  6.7481275 = idf(docFreq=140, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4682)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.2857143 = coord(2/7)
    
    Abstract
    The OWL Web Ontology Language is designed for use by applications that need to process the content of information instead of just presenting information to humans. OWL facilitates greater machine interpretability of Web content than that supported by XML, RDF, and RDF Schema (RDF-S) by providing additional vocabulary along with a formal semantics. OWL has three increasingly-expressive sublanguages: OWL Lite, OWL DL, and OWL Full. This document is written for readers who want a first impression of the capabilities of OWL. It provides an introduction to OWL by informally describing the features of each of the sublanguages of OWL. Some knowledge of RDF Schema is useful for understanding this document, but not essential. After this document, interested readers may turn to the OWL Guide for more detailed descriptions and extensive examples on the features of OWL. The normative formal definition of OWL can be found in the OWL Semantics and Abstract Syntax.
  7. Monireh, E.; Sarker, M.K.; Bianchi, F.; Hitzler, P.; Doran, D.; Xie, N.: Reasoning over RDF knowledge bases using deep learning (2018) 0.01
    0.009949936 = product of:
      0.034824774 = sum of:
        0.021635616 = weight(_text_:with in 4553) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.021635616 = score(doc=4553,freq=6.0), product of:
            0.09383348 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.409771 = idf(docFreq=10797, maxDocs=44218)
              0.038938753 = queryNorm
            0.2305746 = fieldWeight in 4553, product of:
              2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
                6.0 = termFreq=6.0
              2.409771 = idf(docFreq=10797, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4553)
        0.013189158 = product of:
          0.026378317 = sum of:
            0.026378317 = weight(_text_:22 in 4553) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.026378317 = score(doc=4553,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.13635688 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.038938753 = 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)
      0.2857143 = coord(2/7)
    
    Abstract
    Semantic Web knowledge representation standards, and in particular RDF and OWL, often come endowed with a formal semantics which is considered to be of fundamental importance for the field. Reasoning, i.e., the drawing of logical inferences from knowledge expressed in such standards, is traditionally based on logical deductive methods and algorithms which can be proven to be sound and complete and terminating, i.e. correct in a very strong sense. For various reasons, though, in particular the scalability issues arising from the ever increasing amounts of Semantic Web data available and the inability of deductive algorithms to deal with noise in the data, it has been argued that alternative means of reasoning should be investigated which bear high promise for high scalability and better robustness. From this perspective, deductive algorithms can be considered the gold standard regarding correctness against which alternative methods need to be tested. In this paper, we show that it is possible to train a Deep Learning system on RDF knowledge graphs, such that it is able to perform reasoning over new RDF knowledge graphs, with high precision and recall compared to the deductive gold standard.
    Date
    16.11.2018 14:22:01
  8. Definition of the CIDOC Conceptual Reference Model (2003) 0.01
    0.008804738 = product of:
      0.030816581 = sum of:
        0.014989593 = weight(_text_:with in 1652) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.014989593 = score(doc=1652,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.09383348 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.409771 = idf(docFreq=10797, maxDocs=44218)
              0.038938753 = queryNorm
            0.15974675 = fieldWeight in 1652, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              2.409771 = idf(docFreq=10797, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1652)
        0.015826989 = product of:
          0.031653978 = sum of:
            0.031653978 = weight(_text_:22 in 1652) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.031653978 = score(doc=1652,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.13635688 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.038938753 = queryNorm
                0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 1652, 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=1652)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.2857143 = coord(2/7)
    
    Abstract
    This document is the formal definition of the CIDOC Conceptual Reference Model ("CRM"), a formal ontology intended to facilitate the integration, mediation and interchange of heterogeneous cultural heritage information. The CRM is the culmination of more than a decade of standards development work by the International Committee for Documentation (CIDOC) of the International Council of Museums (ICOM). Work on the CRM itself began in 1996 under the auspices of the ICOM-CIDOC Documentation Standards Working Group. Since 2000, development of the CRM has been officially delegated by ICOM-CIDOC to the CIDOC CRM Special Interest Group, which collaborates with the ISO working group ISO/TC46/SC4/WG9 to bring the CRM to the form and status of an International Standard.
    Date
    6. 8.2010 14:22:28
  9. Bittner, T.; Donnelly, M.; Winter, S.: Ontology and semantic interoperability (2006) 0.01
    0.008804738 = product of:
      0.030816581 = sum of:
        0.014989593 = weight(_text_:with in 4820) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.014989593 = score(doc=4820,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.09383348 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.409771 = idf(docFreq=10797, maxDocs=44218)
              0.038938753 = queryNorm
            0.15974675 = fieldWeight in 4820, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              2.409771 = idf(docFreq=10797, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4820)
        0.015826989 = product of:
          0.031653978 = sum of:
            0.031653978 = weight(_text_:22 in 4820) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.031653978 = score(doc=4820,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.13635688 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.038938753 = 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)
      0.2857143 = coord(2/7)
    
    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
  10. Beppler, F.D.; Fonseca, F.T.; Pacheco, R.C.S.: Hermeneus: an architecture for an ontology-enabled information retrieval (2008) 0.01
    0.008804738 = product of:
      0.030816581 = sum of:
        0.014989593 = weight(_text_:with in 3261) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.014989593 = score(doc=3261,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.09383348 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.409771 = idf(docFreq=10797, maxDocs=44218)
              0.038938753 = queryNorm
            0.15974675 = fieldWeight in 3261, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              2.409771 = idf(docFreq=10797, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=3261)
        0.015826989 = product of:
          0.031653978 = sum of:
            0.031653978 = weight(_text_:22 in 3261) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.031653978 = score(doc=3261,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.13635688 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.038938753 = 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)
      0.2857143 = 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
  11. Favato Barcelos, P.P.; Sales, T.P.; Fumagalli, M.; Guizzardi, G.; Valle Sousa, I.; Fonseca, C.M.; Romanenko, E.; Kritz, J.: ¬A FAIR model catalog for ontology-driven conceptual modeling research (2022) 0.01
    0.006996738 = product of:
      0.048977163 = sum of:
        0.048977163 = product of:
          0.097954325 = sum of:
            0.097954325 = weight(_text_:humans in 756) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.097954325 = score(doc=756,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.26276368 = queryWeight, product of:
                  6.7481275 = idf(docFreq=140, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.038938753 = queryNorm
                0.37278488 = fieldWeight in 756, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  6.7481275 = idf(docFreq=140, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=756)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.14285715 = coord(1/7)
    
    Abstract
    Conceptual models are artifacts representing conceptualizations of particular domains. Hence, multi-domain model catalogs serve as empirical sources of knowledge and insights about specific domains, about the use of a modeling language's constructs, as well as about the patterns and anti-patterns recurrent in the models of that language crosscutting different domains. However, to support domain and language learning, model reuse, knowledge discovery for humans, and reliable automated processing and analysis by machines, these catalogs must be built following generally accepted quality requirements for scientific data management. Especially, all scientific (meta)data-including models-should be created using the FAIR principles (Findability, Accessibility, Interoperability, and Reusability). In this paper, we report on the construction of a FAIR model catalog for Ontology-Driven Conceptual Modeling research, a trending paradigm lying at the intersection of conceptual modeling and ontology engineering in which the Unified Foundational Ontology (UFO) and OntoUML emerged among the most adopted technologies. In this initial release, the catalog includes over a hundred models, developed in a variety of contexts and domains. The paper also discusses the research implications for (ontology-driven) conceptual modeling of such a resource.
  12. Paralic, J.; Kostial, I.: Ontology-based information retrieval (2003) 0.00
    0.004327123 = product of:
      0.03028986 = sum of:
        0.03028986 = weight(_text_:with in 1153) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.03028986 = score(doc=1153,freq=6.0), product of:
            0.09383348 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.409771 = idf(docFreq=10797, maxDocs=44218)
              0.038938753 = queryNorm
            0.32280442 = fieldWeight in 1153, product of:
              2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
                6.0 = termFreq=6.0
              2.409771 = idf(docFreq=10797, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=1153)
      0.14285715 = coord(1/7)
    
    Abstract
    In the proposed article a new, ontology-based approach to information retrieval (IR) is presented. The system is based on a domain knowledge representation schema in form of ontology. New resources registered within the system are linked to concepts from this ontology. In such a way resources may be retrieved based on the associations and not only based on partial or exact term matching as the use of vector model presumes In order to evaluate the quality of this retrieval mechanism, experiments to measure retrieval efficiency have been performed with well-known Cystic Fibrosis collection of medical scientific papers. The ontology-based retrieval mechanism has been compared with traditional full text search based on vector IR model as well as with the Latent Semantic Indexing method.
  13. Suchanek, F.M.; Kasneci, G.; Weikum, G.: YAGO: a core of semantic knowledge unifying WordNet and Wikipedia (2007) 0.00
    0.004282741 = product of:
      0.029979186 = sum of:
        0.029979186 = weight(_text_:with in 3403) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.029979186 = score(doc=3403,freq=8.0), product of:
            0.09383348 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.409771 = idf(docFreq=10797, maxDocs=44218)
              0.038938753 = queryNorm
            0.3194935 = fieldWeight in 3403, product of:
              2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
                8.0 = termFreq=8.0
              2.409771 = idf(docFreq=10797, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=3403)
      0.14285715 = coord(1/7)
    
    Abstract
    We present YAGO, a light-weight and extensible ontology with high coverage and quality. YAGO builds on entities and relations and currently contains more than 1 million entities and 5 million facts. This includes the Is-A hierarchy as well as non-taxonomic relations between entities (such as hasWonPrize). The facts have been automatically extracted from Wikipedia and unified with WordNet, using a carefully designed combination of rule-based and heuristic methods described in this paper. The resulting knowledge base is a major step beyond WordNet: in quality by adding knowledge about individuals like persons, organizations, products, etc. with their semantic relationships - and in quantity by increasing the number of facts by more than an order of magnitude. Our empirical evaluation of fact correctness shows an accuracy of about 95%. YAGO is based on a logically clean model, which is decidable, extensible, and compatible with RDFS. Finally, we show how YAGO can be further extended by state-of-the-art information extraction techniques.
  14. Tomassen, S.L.: Research on ontology-driven information retrieval (2006 (?)) 0.00
    0.004282741 = product of:
      0.029979186 = sum of:
        0.029979186 = weight(_text_:with in 4328) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.029979186 = score(doc=4328,freq=8.0), product of:
            0.09383348 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.409771 = idf(docFreq=10797, maxDocs=44218)
              0.038938753 = queryNorm
            0.3194935 = fieldWeight in 4328, product of:
              2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
                8.0 = termFreq=8.0
              2.409771 = idf(docFreq=10797, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4328)
      0.14285715 = coord(1/7)
    
    Abstract
    An increasing number of recent information retrieval systems make use of ontologies to help the users clarify their information needs and come up with semantic representations of documents. A particular concern here is the integration of these semantic approaches with traditional search technology. The research presented in this paper examines how ontologies can be efficiently applied to large-scale search systems for the web. We describe how these systems can be enriched with adapted ontologies to provide both an in-depth understanding of the user's needs as well as an easy integration with standard vector-space retrieval systems. The ontology concepts are adapted to the domain terminology by computing a feature vector for each concept. Later, the feature vectors are used to enrich a provided query. The whole retrieval system is under development as part of a larger Semantic Web standardization project for the Norwegian oil & gas sector.
  15. Bold, N.; Kim, W.-J.; Yang, J.-D.: Converting object-based thesauri into XML Topic Maps (2010) 0.00
    0.004282741 = product of:
      0.029979186 = sum of:
        0.029979186 = weight(_text_:with in 4799) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.029979186 = score(doc=4799,freq=8.0), product of:
            0.09383348 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.409771 = idf(docFreq=10797, maxDocs=44218)
              0.038938753 = queryNorm
            0.3194935 = fieldWeight in 4799, product of:
              2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
                8.0 = termFreq=8.0
              2.409771 = idf(docFreq=10797, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4799)
      0.14285715 = coord(1/7)
    
    Abstract
    Constructing ontology is considerably time consuming process in general. Since there are a vast amount of thesauri currently available, it may be a feasible solution to exploit thesauri, when constructing ontology in a short period of time. This paper designs and implements a XTM (XML Topic Maps) code converter generating XTM coded ontology from an object based thesaurus. It is an extended thesaurus, which enriches the conventional thesauri with user defined associations, a notion of instances and occurrences associated with them. The reason we adopt XTM is that it is a verified and practical methodology to semantically reorganize the conceptual structure of extant web applications with minimal effort. Moreover, since XTM is conceptually similar to our object based thesauri, recommendation and inference mechanism already developed in our system could be easily applied to the generated XTM ontology. To show that the XTM ontology is correct, we also verify it with onto pia Omnigator and Vizigator, the components of Ontopia Knowledge Suite (OKS) tool.
  16. Mäkelä, E.; Hyvönen, E.; Saarela, S.; Vilfanen, K.: Application of ontology techniques to view-based semantic serach and browsing (2012) 0.00
    0.004282741 = product of:
      0.029979186 = sum of:
        0.029979186 = weight(_text_:with in 3264) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.029979186 = score(doc=3264,freq=8.0), product of:
            0.09383348 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.409771 = idf(docFreq=10797, maxDocs=44218)
              0.038938753 = queryNorm
            0.3194935 = fieldWeight in 3264, product of:
              2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
                8.0 = termFreq=8.0
              2.409771 = idf(docFreq=10797, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=3264)
      0.14285715 = coord(1/7)
    
    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.
  17. Aitken, S.; Reid, S.: Evaluation of an ontology-based information retrieval tool (2000) 0.00
    0.004037807 = product of:
      0.02826465 = sum of:
        0.02826465 = weight(_text_:with in 2862) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.02826465 = score(doc=2862,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.09383348 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.409771 = idf(docFreq=10797, maxDocs=44218)
              0.038938753 = queryNorm
            0.30122137 = fieldWeight in 2862, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              2.409771 = idf(docFreq=10797, 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.
  18. Tudhope, D.; Hodge, G.: Terminology registries (2007) 0.00
    0.0037683311 = product of:
      0.026378317 = sum of:
        0.026378317 = product of:
          0.052756634 = sum of:
            0.052756634 = weight(_text_:22 in 539) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.052756634 = score(doc=539,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.13635688 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.038938753 = queryNorm
                0.38690117 = fieldWeight in 539, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=539)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.14285715 = coord(1/7)
    
    Date
    26.12.2011 13:22:07
  19. Schmitz-Esser, W.; Sigel, A.: Introducing terminology-based ontologies : Papers and Materials presented by the authors at the workshop "Introducing Terminology-based Ontologies" (Poli/Schmitz-Esser/Sigel) at the 9th International Conference of the International Society for Knowledge Organization (ISKO), Vienna, Austria, July 6th, 2006 (2006) 0.00
    0.0037089628 = product of:
      0.025962738 = sum of:
        0.025962738 = weight(_text_:with in 1285) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.025962738 = score(doc=1285,freq=6.0), product of:
            0.09383348 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.409771 = idf(docFreq=10797, maxDocs=44218)
              0.038938753 = queryNorm
            0.2766895 = fieldWeight in 1285, product of:
              2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
                6.0 = termFreq=6.0
              2.409771 = idf(docFreq=10797, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1285)
      0.14285715 = coord(1/7)
    
    Abstract
    This work-in-progress communication contains the papers and materials presented by Winfried Schmitz-Esser and Alexander Sigel in the joint workshop (with Roberto Poli) "Introducing Terminology-based Ontologies" at the 9th International Conference of the International Society for Knowledge Organization (ISKO), Vienna, Austria, July 6th, 2006.
    Content
    Inhalt: 1. From traditional Knowledge Organization Systems (authority files, classifications, thesauri) towards ontologies on the web (Alexander Sigel) (Tutorial. Paper with Slides interspersed) pp. 3-53 2. Introduction to Integrative Cross-Language Ontology (ICLO): Formalizing and interrelating textual knowledge to enable intelligent action and knowledge sharing (Winfried Schmitz-Esser) pp. 54-113 3. First Idea Sketch on Modelling ICLO with Topic Maps (Alexander Sigel) (Work in progress paper. Topic maps available from the author) pp. 114-130
  20. Davies, J.; Weeks, R.; Krohn, U.: QuizRDF: search technology for the Semantic Web (2004) 0.00
    0.0037089628 = product of:
      0.025962738 = sum of:
        0.025962738 = weight(_text_:with in 4316) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.025962738 = score(doc=4316,freq=6.0), product of:
            0.09383348 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.409771 = idf(docFreq=10797, maxDocs=44218)
              0.038938753 = queryNorm
            0.2766895 = fieldWeight in 4316, product of:
              2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
                6.0 = termFreq=6.0
              2.409771 = idf(docFreq=10797, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4316)
      0.14285715 = coord(1/7)
    
    Abstract
    An information-seeking system is described which combines traditional keyword querying of WWW resources with the ability to browse and query against RDF annotations of those resources. RDF(S) and RDF are used to specify and populate an ontology and the resultant RDF annotations are then indexed along with the full text of the annotated resources. The resultant index allows both keyword querying against the full text of the document and the literal values occurring in the RDF annotations, along with the ability to browse and query the ontology. We motivate our approach as a key enabler for fully exploiting the Semantic Web in the area of knowledge management and argue that the ability to combine searching and browsing behaviours more fully supports a typical information-seeking task. The approach is characterised as "low threshold, high ceiling" in the sense that where RDF annotations exist they are exploited for an improved information-seeking experience but where they do not yet exist, a search capability is still available.

Years

Types

  • a 44
  • n 6
  • x 3
  • p 1
  • r 1
  • s 1
  • More… Less…