Search (83 results, page 1 of 5)

  • × language_ss:"e"
  • × theme_ss:"Wissensrepräsentation"
  • × type_ss:"el"
  1. Tudhope, D.; Hodge, G.: Terminology registries (2007) 0.00
    0.0047144084 = product of:
      0.03535806 = sum of:
        0.015727427 = weight(_text_:und in 539) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.015727427 = score(doc=539,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.06422601 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
              0.028978055 = queryNorm
            0.24487628 = fieldWeight in 539, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
              0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=539)
        0.019630633 = product of:
          0.039261267 = sum of:
            0.039261267 = weight(_text_:22 in 539) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.039261267 = score(doc=539,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.101476215 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.028978055 = 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)
      0.13333334 = coord(2/15)
    
    Date
    26.12.2011 13:22:07
    Theme
    Konzeption und Anwendung des Prinzips Thesaurus
  2. Scheir, P.; Pammer, V.; Lindstaedt, S.N.: Information retrieval on the Semantic Web : does it exist? (2007) 0.00
    0.0024974653 = product of:
      0.018730989 = sum of:
        0.011009198 = weight(_text_:und in 4329) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.011009198 = score(doc=4329,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.06422601 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
              0.028978055 = queryNorm
            0.17141339 = fieldWeight in 4329, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=4329)
        0.0077217915 = product of:
          0.015443583 = sum of:
            0.015443583 = weight(_text_:information in 4329) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.015443583 = score(doc=4329,freq=10.0), product of:
                0.050870337 = queryWeight, product of:
                  1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.028978055 = queryNorm
                0.3035872 = fieldWeight in 4329, product of:
                  3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
                    10.0 = termFreq=10.0
                  1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=4329)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.13333334 = coord(2/15)
    
    Abstract
    Plenty of contemporary attempts to search exist that are associated with the area of Semantic Web. But which of them qualify as information retrieval for the Semantic Web? Do such approaches exist? To answer these questions we take a look at the nature of the Semantic Web and Semantic Desktop and at definitions for information and data retrieval. We survey current approaches referred to by their authors as information retrieval for the Semantic Web or that use Semantic Web technology for search.
    Content
    Enthält einen Überblick über Modelle, Systeme und Projekte
    Source
    Lernen - Wissen - Adaption : workshop proceedings / LWA 2007, Halle, September 2007. Martin Luther University Halle-Wittenberg, Institute for Informatics, Databases and Information Systems. Hrsg.: Alexander Hinneburg
  3. Mayfield, J.; Finin, T.: Information retrieval on the Semantic Web : integrating inference and retrieval 0.00
    0.0024833512 = product of:
      0.037250265 = sum of:
        0.037250265 = sum of:
          0.009767379 = weight(_text_:information in 4330) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
            0.009767379 = score(doc=4330,freq=4.0), product of:
              0.050870337 = queryWeight, product of:
                1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
                0.028978055 = queryNorm
              0.1920054 = fieldWeight in 4330, 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=4330)
          0.027482886 = weight(_text_:22 in 4330) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
            0.027482886 = score(doc=4330,freq=2.0), product of:
              0.101476215 = queryWeight, product of:
                3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                0.028978055 = queryNorm
              0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 4330, 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=4330)
      0.06666667 = coord(1/15)
    
    Abstract
    One vision of the Semantic Web is that it will be much like the Web we know today, except that documents will be enriched by annotations in machine understandable markup. These annotations will provide metadata about the documents as well as machine interpretable statements capturing some of the meaning of document content. We discuss how the information retrieval paradigm might be recast in such an environment. We suggest that retrieval can be tightly bound to inference. Doing so makes today's Web search engines useful to Semantic Web inference engines, and causes improvements in either retrieval or inference to lead directly to improvements in the other.
    Date
    12. 2.2011 17:35:22
  4. Beppler, F.D.; Fonseca, F.T.; Pacheco, R.C.S.: Hermeneus: an architecture for an ontology-enabled information retrieval (2008) 0.00
    0.0024529411 = product of:
      0.036794115 = sum of:
        0.036794115 = sum of:
          0.013237357 = weight(_text_:information in 3261) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
            0.013237357 = score(doc=3261,freq=10.0), product of:
              0.050870337 = queryWeight, product of:
                1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
                0.028978055 = queryNorm
              0.2602176 = fieldWeight in 3261, product of:
                3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
                  10.0 = termFreq=10.0
                1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
                0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=3261)
          0.023556758 = weight(_text_:22 in 3261) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
            0.023556758 = score(doc=3261,freq=2.0), product of:
              0.101476215 = queryWeight, product of:
                3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                0.028978055 = 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)
      0.06666667 = coord(1/15)
    
    Abstract
    Ontologies improve IR systems regarding its retrieval and presentation of information, which make the task of finding information more effective, efficient, and interactive. In this paper we argue that ontologies also greatly improve the engineering of such systems. We created a framework that uses ontology to drive the process of engineering an IR system. We developed a prototype that shows how a domain specialist without knowledge in the IR field can build an IR system with interactive components. The resulting system provides support for users not only to find their information needs but also to extend their state of knowledge. This way, our approach to ontology-enabled information retrieval addresses both the engineering aspect described here and also the usability aspect described elsewhere.
    Date
    28.11.2016 12:43:22
  5. Bittner, T.; Donnelly, M.; Winter, S.: Ontology and semantic interoperability (2006) 0.00
    0.0023597742 = product of:
      0.03539661 = sum of:
        0.03539661 = sum of:
          0.011839852 = weight(_text_:information in 4820) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
            0.011839852 = score(doc=4820,freq=8.0), product of:
              0.050870337 = queryWeight, product of:
                1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
                0.028978055 = queryNorm
              0.23274569 = fieldWeight in 4820, product of:
                2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
                  8.0 = termFreq=8.0
                1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
                0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4820)
          0.023556758 = weight(_text_:22 in 4820) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
            0.023556758 = score(doc=4820,freq=2.0), product of:
              0.101476215 = queryWeight, product of:
                3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                0.028978055 = 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)
      0.06666667 = coord(1/15)
    
    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
  6. Priss, U.: Faceted knowledge representation (1999) 0.00
    0.0022926312 = product of:
      0.034389466 = sum of:
        0.034389466 = sum of:
          0.00690658 = weight(_text_:information in 2654) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
            0.00690658 = score(doc=2654,freq=2.0), product of:
              0.050870337 = queryWeight, product of:
                1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
                0.028978055 = queryNorm
              0.13576832 = fieldWeight in 2654, product of:
                1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                  2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
                0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=2654)
          0.027482886 = weight(_text_:22 in 2654) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
            0.027482886 = score(doc=2654,freq=2.0), product of:
              0.101476215 = queryWeight, product of:
                3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                0.028978055 = 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)
      0.06666667 = coord(1/15)
    
    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
  7. Gladun, A.; Rogushina, J.: Development of domain thesaurus as a set of ontology concepts with use of semantic similarity and elements of combinatorial optimization (2021) 0.00
    0.0021190518 = product of:
      0.015892887 = sum of:
        0.011009198 = weight(_text_:und in 572) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.011009198 = score(doc=572,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.06422601 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
              0.028978055 = queryNorm
            0.17141339 = fieldWeight in 572, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=572)
        0.0048836893 = product of:
          0.009767379 = sum of:
            0.009767379 = weight(_text_:information in 572) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.009767379 = score(doc=572,freq=4.0), product of:
                0.050870337 = queryWeight, product of:
                  1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.028978055 = queryNorm
                0.1920054 = fieldWeight in 572, product of:
                  2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                    4.0 = termFreq=4.0
                  1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=572)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.13333334 = coord(2/15)
    
    Abstract
    We consider use of ontological background knowledge in intelligent information systems and analyze directions of their reduction in compliance with specifics of particular user task. Such reduction is aimed at simplification of knowledge processing without loss of significant information. We propose methods of generation of task thesauri based on domain ontology that contain such subset of ontological concepts and relations that can be used in task solving. Combinatorial optimization is used for minimization of task thesaurus. In this approach, semantic similarity estimates are used for determination of concept significance for user task. Some practical examples of optimized thesauri application for semantic retrieval and competence analysis demonstrate efficiency of proposed approach.
    Theme
    Konzeption und Anwendung des Prinzips Thesaurus
  8. Definition of the CIDOC Conceptual Reference Model (2003) 0.00
    0.0019651123 = product of:
      0.029476684 = sum of:
        0.029476684 = sum of:
          0.005919926 = weight(_text_:information in 1652) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
            0.005919926 = score(doc=1652,freq=2.0), product of:
              0.050870337 = queryWeight, product of:
                1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
                0.028978055 = queryNorm
              0.116372846 = fieldWeight in 1652, 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=1652)
          0.023556758 = weight(_text_:22 in 1652) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
            0.023556758 = score(doc=1652,freq=2.0), product of:
              0.101476215 = queryWeight, product of:
                3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                0.028978055 = 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)
      0.06666667 = coord(1/15)
    
    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. Priss, U.: Description logic and faceted knowledge representation (1999) 0.00
    0.0019651123 = product of:
      0.029476684 = sum of:
        0.029476684 = sum of:
          0.005919926 = weight(_text_:information in 2655) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
            0.005919926 = score(doc=2655,freq=2.0), product of:
              0.050870337 = queryWeight, product of:
                1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
                0.028978055 = queryNorm
              0.116372846 = fieldWeight in 2655, 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=2655)
          0.023556758 = weight(_text_:22 in 2655) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
            0.023556758 = score(doc=2655,freq=2.0), product of:
              0.101476215 = queryWeight, product of:
                3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                0.028978055 = 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)
      0.06666667 = coord(1/15)
    
    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
  10. 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
  11. Assem, M. van; Gangemi, A.; Schreiber, G.: Conversion of WordNet to a standard RDF/OWL representation (2006) 0.00
    0.0016528559 = product of:
      0.0123964185 = sum of:
        0.009436456 = weight(_text_:und in 4641) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.009436456 = score(doc=4641,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.06422601 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
              0.028978055 = queryNorm
            0.14692576 = fieldWeight in 4641, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4641)
        0.002959963 = product of:
          0.005919926 = sum of:
            0.005919926 = weight(_text_:information in 4641) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.005919926 = score(doc=4641,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.050870337 = queryWeight, product of:
                  1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.028978055 = queryNorm
                0.116372846 = fieldWeight in 4641, 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=4641)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.13333334 = coord(2/15)
    
    Abstract
    This paper presents an overview of the work in progress at the W3C to produce a standard conversion of WordNet to the RDF/OWL representation language in use in the SemanticWeb community. Such a standard representation is useful to provide application developers a high-quality resource and to promote interoperability. Important requirements in this conversion process are that it should be complete and should stay close to WordNet's conceptual model. The paper explains the steps taken to produce the conversion and details design decisions such as the composition of the class hierarchy and properties, the addition of suitable OWL semantics and the chosen format of the URIs. Additional topics include a strategy to incorporate OWL and RDFS semantics in one schema such that both RDF(S) infrastructure and OWL infrastructure can interpret the information correctly, problems encountered in understanding the Prolog source files and the description of the two versions that are provided (Basic and Full) to accommodate different usages of WordNet.
    Theme
    Konzeption und Anwendung des Prinzips Thesaurus
  12. 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
  13. OWL Web Ontology Language Test Cases (2004) 0.00
    0.0010469672 = product of:
      0.015704507 = sum of:
        0.015704507 = product of:
          0.031409014 = sum of:
            0.031409014 = weight(_text_:22 in 4685) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.031409014 = score(doc=4685,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.101476215 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.028978055 = queryNorm
                0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 4685, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=4685)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.06666667 = coord(1/15)
    
    Date
    14. 8.2011 13:33:22
  14. 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
  15. Assem, M. van; Menken, M.R.; Schreiber, G.; Wielemaker, J.; Wielinga, B.: ¬A method for converting thesauri to RDF/OWL (2004) 0.00
    7.3394657E-4 = product of:
      0.011009198 = sum of:
        0.011009198 = weight(_text_:und in 4644) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.011009198 = score(doc=4644,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.06422601 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
              0.028978055 = queryNorm
            0.17141339 = fieldWeight in 4644, 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=4644)
      0.06666667 = coord(1/15)
    
    Theme
    Konzeption und Anwendung des Prinzips Thesaurus
  16. Quick Guide to Publishing a Thesaurus on the Semantic Web (2008) 0.00
    7.3394657E-4 = product of:
      0.011009198 = sum of:
        0.011009198 = weight(_text_:und in 4656) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.011009198 = score(doc=4656,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.06422601 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
              0.028978055 = queryNorm
            0.17141339 = fieldWeight in 4656, 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=4656)
      0.06666667 = coord(1/15)
    
    Theme
    Konzeption und Anwendung des Prinzips Thesaurus
  17. 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
  18. Assem, M. van; Malaisé, V.; Miles, A.; Schreiber, G.: ¬A method to convert thesauri to SKOS (2006) 0.00
    6.2909705E-4 = product of:
      0.009436456 = sum of:
        0.009436456 = weight(_text_:und in 4642) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.009436456 = score(doc=4642,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.06422601 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
              0.028978055 = queryNorm
            0.14692576 = fieldWeight in 4642, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4642)
      0.06666667 = coord(1/15)
    
    Theme
    Konzeption und Anwendung des Prinzips Thesaurus
  19. Rindflesch, T.C.; Aronson, A.R.: Semantic processing in information retrieval (1993) 0.00
    4.604387E-4 = product of:
      0.00690658 = sum of:
        0.00690658 = product of:
          0.01381316 = sum of:
            0.01381316 = weight(_text_:information in 4121) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.01381316 = score(doc=4121,freq=8.0), product of:
                0.050870337 = queryWeight, product of:
                  1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.028978055 = queryNorm
                0.27153665 = fieldWeight in 4121, product of:
                  2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
                    8.0 = termFreq=8.0
                  1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=4121)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.06666667 = coord(1/15)
    
    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.
  20. Aizawa, A.; Kohlhase, M.: Mathematical information retrieval (2021) 0.00
    4.604387E-4 = product of:
      0.00690658 = sum of:
        0.00690658 = product of:
          0.01381316 = sum of:
            0.01381316 = weight(_text_:information in 667) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.01381316 = score(doc=667,freq=8.0), product of:
                0.050870337 = queryWeight, product of:
                  1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.028978055 = queryNorm
                0.27153665 = fieldWeight in 667, product of:
                  2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
                    8.0 = termFreq=8.0
                  1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=667)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.06666667 = coord(1/15)
    
    Abstract
    We present an overview of the NTCIR Math Tasks organized during NTCIR-10, 11, and 12. These tasks are primarily dedicated to techniques for searching mathematical content with formula expressions. In this chapter, we first summarize the task design and introduce test collections generated in the tasks. We also describe the features and main challenges of mathematical information retrieval systems and discuss future perspectives in the field.
    Series
    ¬The Information retrieval series, vol 43
    Source
    Evaluating information retrieval and access tasks. Eds.: Sakai, T., Oard, D., Kando, N. [https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-15-5554-1_12]

Years

Types

  • a 39
  • n 5
  • p 2
  • x 2
  • s 1
  • More… Less…