Search (178 results, page 2 of 9)

  • × theme_ss:"Computerlinguistik"
  • × year_i:[2000 TO 2010}
  1. Chandrasekar, R.; Bangalore, S.: Glean : using syntactic information in document filtering (2002) 0.01 
    0.0113330465 = product of:
  0.05288755 = sum of:
    0.017435152 = weight(_text_:web in 4257) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.017435152 = score(doc=4257,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.09670874 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
          0.029633347 = queryNorm
        0.18028519 = fieldWeight in 4257, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4257)
    0.014268933 = weight(_text_:information in 4257) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.014268933 = score(doc=4257,freq=16.0), product of:
        0.052020688 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.029633347 = queryNorm
        0.27429342 = fieldWeight in 4257, product of:
          4.0 = tf(freq=16.0), with freq of:
            16.0 = termFreq=16.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4257)
    0.021183468 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 4257) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.021183468 = score(doc=4257,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.08963835 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
          0.029633347 = queryNorm
        0.23632148 = fieldWeight in 4257, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4257)
  0.21428572 = coord(3/14)
    Abstract
    In today's networked world, a huge amount of data is available in machine-processable form. Likewise, there are any number of search engines and specialized information retrieval (IR) programs that seek to extract relevant information from these data repositories. Most IR systems and Web search engines have been designed for speed and tend to maximize the quantity of information (recall) rather than the relevance of the information (precision) to the query. As a result, search engine users get inundated with information for practically any query, and are forced to scan a large number of potentially relevant items to get to the information of interest. The Holy Grail of IR is to somehow retrieve those and only those documents pertinent to the user's query. Polysemy and synonymy - the fact that often there are several meanings for a word or phrase, and likewise, many ways to express a conceptmake this a very hard task. While conventional IR systems provide usable solutions, there are a number of open problems to be solved, in areas such as syntactic processing, semantic analysis, and user modeling, before we develop systems that "understand" user queries and text collections. Meanwhile, we can use tools and techniques available today to improve the precision of retrieval. In particular, using the approach described in this article, we can approximate understanding using the syntactic structure and patterns of language use that is latent in documents to make IR more effective.
    Source
    Encyclopedia of library and information science. Vol.71, [=Suppl.34]
  2. Pirkola, A.; Hedlund, T.; Keskustalo, H.; Järvelin, K.: Dictionary-based cross-language information retrieval : problems, methods, and research findings (2001) 0.01 
    0.0113271745 = product of:
  0.07929022 = sum of:
    0.019976506 = weight(_text_:information in 3908) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.019976506 = score(doc=3908,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.052020688 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.029633347 = queryNorm
        0.3840108 = fieldWeight in 3908, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=3908)
    0.05931371 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 3908) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.05931371 = score(doc=3908,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.08963835 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
          0.029633347 = queryNorm
        0.6617001 = fieldWeight in 3908, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
          0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=3908)
  0.14285715 = coord(2/14)
    Source
    Information retrieval. 4(2001), S.209-230
  3. Schneider, R.: Web 3.0 ante portas? : Integration von Social Web und Semantic Web (2008) 0.01 
    0.01056412 = product of:
  0.07394883 = sum of:
    0.06458071 = weight(_text_:web in 4184) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.06458071 = score(doc=4184,freq=14.0), product of:
        0.09670874 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
          0.029633347 = queryNorm
        0.6677857 = fieldWeight in 4184, product of:
          3.7416575 = tf(freq=14.0), with freq of:
            14.0 = termFreq=14.0
          3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=4184)
    0.009368123 = product of:
      0.028104367 = sum of:
        0.028104367 = weight(_text_:22 in 4184) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.028104367 = score(doc=4184,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.103770934 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.029633347 = queryNorm
            0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 4184, 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=4184)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.14285715 = coord(2/14)
    Abstract
    Das Medium Internet ist im Wandel, und mit ihm ändern sich seine Publikations- und Rezeptionsbedingungen. Welche Chancen bieten die momentan parallel diskutierten Zukunftsentwürfe von Social Web und Semantic Web? Zur Beantwortung dieser Frage beschäftigt sich der Beitrag mit den Grundlagen beider Modelle unter den Aspekten Anwendungsbezug und Technologie, beleuchtet darüber hinaus jedoch auch deren Unzulänglichkeiten sowie den Mehrwert einer mediengerechten Kombination. Am Beispiel des grammatischen Online-Informationssystems grammis wird eine Strategie zur integrativen Nutzung der jeweiligen Stärken skizziert.
    Date
    22. 1.2011 10:38:28
    Source
    Kommunikation, Partizipation und Wirkungen im Social Web, Band 1. Hrsg.: A. Zerfaß u.a
    Theme
    Semantic Web
  4. Nait-Baha, L.; Jackiewicz, A.; Djioua, B.; Laublet, P.: Query reformulation for information retrieval on the Web using the point of view methodology : preliminary results (2001) 0.01 
    0.010169638 = product of:
  0.047458313 = sum of:
    0.020922182 = weight(_text_:web in 249) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.020922182 = score(doc=249,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.09670874 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
          0.029633347 = queryNorm
        0.21634221 = fieldWeight in 249, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=249)
    0.00856136 = weight(_text_:information in 249) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.00856136 = score(doc=249,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.052020688 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.029633347 = queryNorm
        0.16457605 = fieldWeight in 249, 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=249)
    0.01797477 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 249) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.01797477 = score(doc=249,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.08963835 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
          0.029633347 = queryNorm
        0.20052543 = fieldWeight in 249, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=249)
  0.21428572 = coord(3/14)
    Abstract
    The work we are presenting is devoted to the information collected on the WWW. By the term collected we mean the whole process of retrieving, extracting and presenting results to the user. This research is part of the RAP (Research, Analyze, Propose) project in which we propose to combine two methods: (i) query reformulation using linguistic markers according to a given point of view; and (ii) text semantic analysis by means of contextual exploration results (Descles, 1991). The general project architecture describing the interactions between the users, the RAP system and the WWW search engines is presented in Nait-Baha et al. (1998). We will focus this paper on showing how we use linguistic markers to reformulate the queries according to a given point of view
  5. Beitzel, S.M.; Jensen, E.C.; Chowdhury, A.; Grossman, D.; Frieder, O; Goharian, N.: Fusion of effective retrieval strategies in the same information retrieval system (2004) 0.01 
    0.010053988 = product of:
  0.07037791 = sum of:
    0.013536699 = weight(_text_:information in 2502) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.013536699 = score(doc=2502,freq=10.0), product of:
        0.052020688 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.029633347 = queryNorm
        0.2602176 = fieldWeight in 2502, 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=2502)
    0.05684121 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 2502) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.05684121 = score(doc=2502,freq=20.0), product of:
        0.08963835 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
          0.029633347 = queryNorm
        0.63411707 = fieldWeight in 2502, product of:
          4.472136 = tf(freq=20.0), with freq of:
            20.0 = termFreq=20.0
          3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2502)
  0.14285715 = coord(2/14)
    Abstract
    Prior efforts have shown that under certain situations retrieval effectiveness may be improved via the use of data fusion techniques. Although these improvements have been observed from the fusion of result sets from several distinct information retrieval systems, it has often been thought that fusing different document retrieval strategies in a single information retrieval system will lead to similar improvements. In this study, we show that this is not the case. We hold constant systemic differences such as parsing, stemming, phrase processing, and relevance feedback, and fuse result sets generated from highly effective retrieval strategies in the same information retrieval system. From this, we show that data fusion of highly effective retrieval strategies alone shows little or no improvement in retrieval effectiveness. Furthermore, we present a detailed analysis of the performance of modern data fusion approaches, and demonstrate the reasons why they do not perform weIl when applied to this problem. Detailed results and analyses are included to support our conclusions.
    Source
    Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 55(2004) no.10, S.859-868
  6. Conceptual structures : logical, linguistic, and computational issues. 8th International Conference on Conceptual Structures, ICCS 2000, Darmstadt, Germany, August 14-18, 2000 (2000) 0.01 
    0.009826231 = product of:
  0.06878361 = sum of:
    0.008987385 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 691) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.008987385 = score(doc=691,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.08963835 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
          0.029633347 = queryNorm
        0.10026272 = fieldWeight in 691, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0234375 = fieldNorm(doc=691)
    0.05979623 = weight(_text_:kongress in 691) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.05979623 = score(doc=691,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.19442701 = queryWeight, product of:
          6.5610886 = idf(docFreq=169, maxDocs=44218)
          0.029633347 = queryNorm
        0.30755103 = fieldWeight in 691, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          6.5610886 = idf(docFreq=169, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0234375 = fieldNorm(doc=691)
  0.14285715 = coord(2/14)
    Content
    Concepts and Language: The Role of Conceptual Structure in Human Evolution (Keith Devlin) - Concepts in Linguistics - Concepts in Natural Language (Gisela Harras) - Patterns, Schemata, and Types: Author Support through Formalized Experience (Felix H. Gatzemeier) - Conventions and Notations for Knowledge Representation and Retrieval (Philippe Martin) - Conceptual Ontology: Ontology, Metadata, and Semiotics (John F. Sowa) - Pragmatically Yours (Mary Keeler) - Conceptual Modeling for Distributed Ontology Environments (Deborah L. McGuinness) - Discovery of Class Relations in Exception Structured Knowledge Bases (Hendra Suryanto, Paul Compton) - Conceptual Graphs: Perspectives: CGs Applications: Where Are We 7 Years after the First ICCS ? (Michel Chein, David Genest) - The Engineering of a CC-Based System: Fundamental Issues (Guy W. Mineau) - Conceptual Graphs, Metamodeling, and Notation of Concepts (Olivier Gerbé, Guy W. Mineau, Rudolf K. Keller) - Knowledge Representation and Reasonings: Based on Graph Homomorphism (Marie-Laure Mugnier) - User Modeling Using Conceptual Graphs for Intelligent Agents (James F. Baldwin, Trevor P. Martin, Aimilia Tzanavari) - Towards a Unified Querying System of Both Structured and Semi-structured Imprecise Data Using Fuzzy View (Patrice Buche, Ollivier Haemmerlé) - Formal Semantics of Conceptual Structures: The Extensional Semantics of the Conceptual Graph Formalism (Guy W. Mineau) - Semantics of Attribute Relations in Conceptual Graphs (Pavel Kocura) - Nested Concept Graphs and Triadic Power Context Families (Susanne Prediger) - Negations in Simple Concept Graphs (Frithjof Dau) - Extending the CG Model by Simulations (Jean-François Baget) - Contextual Logic and Formal Concept Analysis: Building and Structuring Description Logic Knowledge Bases: Using Least Common Subsumers and Concept Analysis (Franz Baader, Ralf Molitor) - On the Contextual Logic of Ordinal Data (Silke Pollandt, Rudolf Wille) - Boolean Concept Logic (Rudolf Wille) - Lattices of Triadic Concept Graphs (Bernd Groh, Rudolf Wille) - Formalizing Hypotheses with Concepts (Bernhard Ganter, Sergei 0. Kuznetsov) - Generalized Formal Concept Analysis (Laurent Chaudron, Nicolas Maille) - A Logical Generalization of Formal Concept Analysis (Sébastien Ferré, Olivier Ridoux) - On the Treatment of Incomplete Knowledge in Formal Concept Analysis (Peter Burmeister, Richard Holzer) - Conceptual Structures in Practice: Logic-Based Networks: Concept Graphs and Conceptual Structures (Peter W. Eklund) - Conceptual Knowledge Discovery and Data Analysis (Joachim Hereth, Gerd Stumme, Rudolf Wille, Uta Wille) - CEM - A Conceptual Email Manager (Richard Cole, Gerd Stumme) - A Contextual-Logic Extension of TOSCANA (Peter Eklund, Bernd Groh, Gerd Stumme, Rudolf Wille) - A Conceptual Graph Model for W3C Resource Description Framework (Olivier Corby, Rose Dieng, Cédric Hébert) - Computational Aspects of Conceptual Structures: Computing with Conceptual Structures (Bernhard Ganter) - Symmetry and the Computation of Conceptual Structures (Robert Levinson) An Introduction to SNePS 3 (Stuart C. Shapiro) - Composition Norm Dynamics Calculation with Conceptual Graphs (Aldo de Moor) - From PROLOG++ to PROLOG+CG: A CG Object-Oriented Logic Programming Language (Adil Kabbaj, Martin Janta-Polczynski) - A Cost-Bounded Algorithm to Control Events Generalization (Gaël de Chalendar, Brigitte Grau, Olivier Ferret)
    RSWK
    Begriffsgraph / Kongress / Darmstadt <2000>
    Subject
    Begriffsgraph / Kongress / Darmstadt <2000>
  7. Kunze, C.: Lexikalisch-semantische Wortnetze in Sprachwissenschaft und Sprachtechnologie (2006) 0.01 
    0.009520924 = product of:
  0.066646464 = sum of:
    0.058574736 = weight(_text_:elektronische in 6023) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.058574736 = score(doc=6023,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.14013545 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.728978 = idf(docFreq=1061, maxDocs=44218)
          0.029633347 = queryNorm
        0.41798657 = fieldWeight in 6023, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          4.728978 = idf(docFreq=1061, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=6023)
    0.008071727 = weight(_text_:information in 6023) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.008071727 = score(doc=6023,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.052020688 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.029633347 = queryNorm
        0.1551638 = fieldWeight in 6023, 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=6023)
  0.14285715 = coord(2/14)
    Abstract
    Dieser Beitrag beschreibt die Strukturierungsprinzipien und Anwendungskontexte lexikalisch-semantischer Wortnetze, insbesondere des deutschen Wortnetzes GermaNet. Wortnetze sind zurzeit besonders populäre elektronische Lexikonressourcen, die große Abdeckungen semantisch strukturierter Datenfür verschiedene Sprachen und Sprachverbünde enthalten. In Wortnetzen sind die häufigsten und wichtigsten Konzepte einer Sprache mit ihren elementaren Bedeutungsrelationen repräsentiert. Zentrale Anwendungen für Wortnetze sind u.a. die Lesartendisambiguierung und die Informationserschließung. Der Artikel skizziert die neusten Szenarien, in denen GermaNet eingesetzt wird: die Semantische Informationserschließung und die Integration allgemeinsprachlicher Wortnetze mit terminologischen Ressourcen vordem Hintergrund der Datenkonvertierung in OWL.
    Source
    Information - Wissenschaft und Praxis. 57(2006) H.6/7, S.309-314
  8. Perez-Carballo, J.; Strzalkowski, T.: Natural language information retrieval : progress report (2000) 0.01 
    0.008845377 = product of:
  0.061917633 = sum of:
    0.019976506 = weight(_text_:information in 6421) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.019976506 = score(doc=6421,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.052020688 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.029633347 = queryNorm
        0.3840108 = fieldWeight in 6421, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=6421)
    0.04194113 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 6421) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.04194113 = score(doc=6421,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.08963835 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
          0.029633347 = queryNorm
        0.46789268 = fieldWeight in 6421, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
          0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=6421)
  0.14285715 = coord(2/14)
    Source
    Information processing and management. 36(2000) no.1, S.155-205
  9. Working with conceptual structures : contributions to ICCS 2000. 8th International Conference on Conceptual Structures: Logical, Linguistic, and Computational Issues. Darmstadt, August 14-18, 2000 (2000) 0.01 
    0.008506065 = product of:
  0.039694972 = sum of:
    0.022496238 = weight(_text_:wide in 5089) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.022496238 = score(doc=5089,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.1312982 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.4307585 = idf(docFreq=1430, maxDocs=44218)
          0.029633347 = queryNorm
        0.171337 = fieldWeight in 5089, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          4.4307585 = idf(docFreq=1430, maxDocs=44218)
          0.02734375 = fieldNorm(doc=5089)
    0.012204607 = weight(_text_:web in 5089) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.012204607 = score(doc=5089,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.09670874 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
          0.029633347 = queryNorm
        0.12619963 = fieldWeight in 5089, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
          0.02734375 = fieldNorm(doc=5089)
    0.0049941265 = weight(_text_:information in 5089) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0049941265 = score(doc=5089,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.052020688 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.029633347 = queryNorm
        0.0960027 = fieldWeight in 5089, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.02734375 = fieldNorm(doc=5089)
  0.21428572 = coord(3/14)
    Abstract
    The 8th International Conference on Conceptual Structures - Logical, Linguistic, and Computational Issues (ICCS 2000) brings together a wide range of researchers and practitioners working with conceptual structures. During the last few years, the ICCS conference series has considerably widened its scope on different kinds of conceptual structures, stimulating research across domain boundaries. We hope that this stimulation is further enhanced by ICCS 2000 joining the long tradition of conferences in Darmstadt with extensive, lively discussions. This volume consists of contributions presented at ICCS 2000, complementing the volume "Conceptual Structures: Logical, Linguistic, and Computational Issues" (B. Ganter, G.W. Mineau (Eds.), LNAI 1867, Springer, Berlin-Heidelberg 2000). It contains submissions reviewed by the program committee, and position papers. We wish to express our appreciation to all the authors of submitted papers, to the general chair, the program chair, the editorial board, the program committee, and to the additional reviewers for making ICCS 2000 a valuable contribution in the knowledge processing research field. Special thanks go to the local organizers for making the conference an enjoyable and inspiring event. We are grateful to Darmstadt University of Technology, the Ernst Schröder Center for Conceptual Knowledge Processing, the Center for Interdisciplinary Studies in Technology, the Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft, Land Hessen, and NaviCon GmbH for their generous support
    Content
    Concepts & Language: Knowledge organization by procedures of natural language processing. A case study using the method GABEK (J. Zelger, J. Gadner) - Computer aided narrative analysis using conceptual graphs (H. Schärfe, P. 0hrstrom) - Pragmatic representation of argumentative text: a challenge for the conceptual graph approach (H. Irandoust, B. Moulin) - Conceptual graphs as a knowledge representation core in a complex language learning environment (G. Angelova, A. Nenkova, S. Boycheva, T. Nikolov) - Conceptual Modeling and Ontologies: Relationships and actions in conceptual categories (Ch. Landauer, K.L. Bellman) - Concept approximations for formal concept analysis (J. Saquer, J.S. Deogun) - Faceted information representation (U. Priß) - Simple concept graphs with universal quantifiers (J. Tappe) - A framework for comparing methods for using or reusing multiple ontologies in an application (J. van ZyI, D. Corbett) - Designing task/method knowledge-based systems with conceptual graphs (M. Leclère, F.Trichet, Ch. Choquet) - A logical ontology (J. Farkas, J. Sarbo) - Algorithms and Tools: Fast concept analysis (Ch. Lindig) - A framework for conceptual graph unification (D. Corbett) - Visual CP representation of knowledge (H.D. Pfeiffer, R.T. Hartley) - Maximal isojoin for representing software textual specifications and detecting semantic anomalies (Th. Charnois) - Troika: using grids, lattices and graphs in knowledge acquisition (H.S. Delugach, B.E. Lampkin) - Open world theorem prover for conceptual graphs (J.E. Heaton, P. Kocura) - NetCare: a practical conceptual graphs software tool (S. Polovina, D. Strang) - CGWorld - a web based workbench for conceptual graphs management and applications (P. Dobrev, K. Toutanova) - Position papers: The edition project: Peirce's existential graphs (R. Mülller) - Mining association rules using formal concept analysis (N. Pasquier) - Contextual logic summary (R Wille) - Information channels and conceptual scaling (K.E. Wolff) - Spatial concepts - a rule exploration (S. Rudolph) - The TEXT-TO-ONTO learning environment (A. Mädche, St. Staab) - Controlling the semantics of metadata on audio-visual documents using ontologies (Th. Dechilly, B. Bachimont) - Building the ontological foundations of a terminology from natural language to conceptual graphs with Ribosome, a knowledge extraction system (Ch. Jacquelinet, A. Burgun) - CharGer: some lessons learned and new directions (H.S. Delugach) - Knowledge management using conceptual graphs (W.K. Pun)
  10. Blair, D.C.: Information retrieval and the philosophy of language (2002) 0.01 
    0.008405258 = product of:
  0.058836803 = sum of:
    0.015630832 = weight(_text_:information in 4283) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.015630832 = score(doc=4283,freq=30.0), product of:
        0.052020688 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.029633347 = queryNorm
        0.3004734 = fieldWeight in 4283, product of:
          5.477226 = tf(freq=30.0), with freq of:
            30.0 = termFreq=30.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=4283)
    0.04320597 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 4283) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.04320597 = score(doc=4283,freq=26.0), product of:
        0.08963835 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
          0.029633347 = queryNorm
        0.48200315 = fieldWeight in 4283, product of:
          5.0990195 = tf(freq=26.0), with freq of:
            26.0 = termFreq=26.0
          3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=4283)
  0.14285715 = coord(2/14)
    Abstract
    Information retrieval - the retrieval, primarily, of documents or textual material - is fundamentally a linguistic process. At the very least we must describe what we want and match that description with descriptions of the information that is available to us. Furthermore, when we describe what we want, we must mean something by that description. This is a deceptively simple act, but such linguistic events have been the grist for philosophical analysis since Aristotle. Although there are complexities involved in referring to authors, document types, or other categories of information retrieval context, here I wish to focus an one of the most problematic activities in information retrieval: the description of the intellectual content of information items. And even though I take information retrieval to involve the description and retrieval of written text, what I say here is applicable to any information item whose intellectual content can be described for retrieval-books, documents, images, audio clips, video clips, scientific specimens, engineering schematics, and so forth. For convenience, though, I will refer only to the description and retrieval of documents. The description of intellectual content can go wrong in many obvious ways. We may describe what we want incorrectly; we may describe it correctly but in such general terms that its description is useless for retrieval; or we may describe what we want correctly, but misinterpret the descriptions of available information, and thereby match our description of what we want incorrectly. From a linguistic point of view, we can be misunderstood in the process of retrieval in many ways. Because the philosophy of language deals specifically with how we are understood and mis-understood, it should have some use for understanding the process of description in information retrieval. First, however, let us examine more closely the kinds of misunderstandings that can occur in information retrieval. We use language in searching for information in two principal ways. We use it to describe what we want and to discriminate what we want from other information that is available to us but that we do not want. Description and discrimination together articulate the goals of the information search process; they also delineate the two principal ways in which language can fail us in this process. Van Rijsbergen (1979) was the first to make this distinction, calling them "representation" and "discrimination.""
    Source
    Annual review of information science and technology. 37(2003), S.3-50
  11. Kettunen, K.: Reductive and generative approaches to management of morphological variation of keywords in monolingual information retrieval : an overview (2009) 0.01 
    0.007787785 = product of:
  0.054514494 = sum of:
    0.0104854815 = weight(_text_:information in 2835) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0104854815 = score(doc=2835,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.052020688 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.029633347 = queryNorm
        0.20156369 = fieldWeight in 2835, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2835)
    0.044029012 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 2835) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.044029012 = score(doc=2835,freq=12.0), product of:
        0.08963835 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
          0.029633347 = queryNorm
        0.49118498 = fieldWeight in 2835, product of:
          3.4641016 = tf(freq=12.0), with freq of:
            12.0 = termFreq=12.0
          3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2835)
  0.14285715 = coord(2/14)
    Abstract
    Purpose - The purpose of this article is to discuss advantages and disadvantages of various means to manage morphological variation of keywords in monolingual information retrieval. Design/methodology/approach - The authors present a compilation of query results from 11 mostly European languages and a new general classification of the language dependent techniques for management of morphological variation. Variants of the different techniques are compared in some detail in terms of retrieval effectiveness and other criteria. The paper consists mainly of an overview of different management methods for keyword variation in information retrieval. Typical IR retrieval results of 11 languages and a new classification for keyword management methods are also presented. Findings - The main results of the paper are an overall comparison of reductive and generative keyword management methods in terms of retrieval effectiveness and other broader criteria. Originality/value - The paper is of value to anyone who wants to get an overall picture of keyword management techniques used in IR.
  12. Ding, Y.; Chowdhury, G.C.; Foo, S.: Incorporating the results of co-word analyses to increase search variety for information retrieval (2000) 0.01 
    0.007581752 = product of:
  0.05307226 = sum of:
    0.01712272 = weight(_text_:information in 6328) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.01712272 = score(doc=6328,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.052020688 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.029633347 = queryNorm
        0.3291521 = fieldWeight in 6328, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=6328)
    0.03594954 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 6328) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.03594954 = score(doc=6328,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.08963835 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
          0.029633347 = queryNorm
        0.40105087 = fieldWeight in 6328, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
          0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=6328)
  0.14285715 = coord(2/14)
    Source
    Journal of information science. 26(2000) no.6, S.429-451
  13. Figuerola, C.G.; Gomez, R.; Lopez de San Roman, E.: Stemming and n-grams in Spanish : an evaluation of their impact in information retrieval (2000) 0.01 
    0.007581752 = product of:
  0.05307226 = sum of:
    0.01712272 = weight(_text_:information in 6501) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.01712272 = score(doc=6501,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.052020688 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.029633347 = queryNorm
        0.3291521 = fieldWeight in 6501, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=6501)
    0.03594954 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 6501) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.03594954 = score(doc=6501,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.08963835 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
          0.029633347 = queryNorm
        0.40105087 = fieldWeight in 6501, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
          0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=6501)
  0.14285715 = coord(2/14)
    Source
    Journal of information science. 26(2000) no.6, S.461-467
  14. Kummer, N.: Indexierungstechniken für das japanische Retrieval (2006) 0.01 
    0.007560872 = product of:
  0.0529261 = sum of:
    0.011415146 = weight(_text_:information in 5979) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.011415146 = score(doc=5979,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.052020688 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.029633347 = queryNorm
        0.21943474 = fieldWeight in 5979, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=5979)
    0.041510954 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 5979) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.041510954 = score(doc=5979,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.08963835 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
          0.029633347 = queryNorm
        0.46309367 = fieldWeight in 5979, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=5979)
  0.14285715 = coord(2/14)
    Abstract
    Der vorliegende Artikel beschreibt die Herausforderungen, die die japanische Sprache aufgrund der besonderen Struktur ihres Schriftsystems an das Information Retrieval stellt und präsentiert Strategien und Ansätze für die Indexierung japanischer Dokumente. Im Besonderen soll auf die Effektivität aussprachebasierter (yomi-based) Indexierung sowie Fusion verschiedener einzelner Indexierungsansätze eingegangen werden.
    Source
    Effektive Information Retrieval Verfahren in Theorie und Praxis: ausgewählte und erweiterte Beiträge des Vierten Hildesheimer Evaluierungs- und Retrievalworkshop (HIER 2005), Hildesheim, 20.7.2005. Hrsg.: T. Mandl u. C. Womser-Hacker
  15. Liu, S.; Liu, F.; Yu, C.; Meng, W.: ¬An effective approach to document retrieval via utilizing WordNet and recognizing phrases (2004) 0.01 
    0.0074937996 = product of:
  0.052456595 = sum of:
    0.010089659 = weight(_text_:information in 4078) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.010089659 = score(doc=4078,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.052020688 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.029633347 = queryNorm
        0.19395474 = fieldWeight in 4078, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=4078)
    0.042366937 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 4078) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.042366937 = score(doc=4078,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.08963835 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
          0.029633347 = queryNorm
        0.47264296 = fieldWeight in 4078, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
          0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=4078)
  0.14285715 = coord(2/14)
    Source
    SIGIR'04: Proceedings of the 27th Annual International ACM-SIGIR Conference an Research and Development in Information Retrieval. Ed.: K. Järvelin, u.a
  16. Ponte, J.M.: Language models for relevance feedback (2000) 0.01 
    0.007471486 = product of:
  0.0523004 = sum of:
    0.012107591 = weight(_text_:information in 35) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.012107591 = score(doc=35,freq=8.0), product of:
        0.052020688 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.029633347 = queryNorm
        0.23274569 = fieldWeight in 35, 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=35)
    0.04019281 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 35) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.04019281 = score(doc=35,freq=10.0), product of:
        0.08963835 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
          0.029633347 = queryNorm
        0.44838852 = fieldWeight in 35, product of:
          3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
            10.0 = termFreq=10.0
          3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=35)
  0.14285715 = coord(2/14)
    Abstract
    The language modeling approach to Information Retrieval (IR) is a conceptually simple model of IR originally developed by Ponte and Croft (1998). In this approach, the query is treated as a random event and documents are ranked according to the likelihood that the query would be generated via a language model estimated for each document. The intuition behind this approach is that users have a prototypical document in mind and will choose query terms accordingly. The intuitive appeal of this method is that inferences about the semantic content of documents do not need to be made resulting in a conceptually simple model. In this paper, techniques for relevance feedback and routing are derived from the language modeling approach in a straightforward manner and their effectiveness is demonstrated empirically. These experiments demonstrate further proof of concept for the language modeling approach to retrieval
    Series
    The Kluwer international series on information retrieval; 7
    Source
    Advances in information retrieval: Recent research from the Center for Intelligent Information Retrieval. Ed.: W.B. Croft
  17. Sprachtechnologie, mobile Kommunikation und linguistische Ressourcen : Beiträge zur GLDV Tagung 2005 in Bonn (2005) 0.01 
    0.0072548836 = product of:
  0.033856124 = sum of:
    0.018119143 = weight(_text_:web in 3578) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.018119143 = score(doc=3578,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.09670874 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
          0.029633347 = queryNorm
        0.18735787 = fieldWeight in 3578, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0234375 = fieldNorm(doc=3578)
    0.0030268978 = weight(_text_:information in 3578) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0030268978 = score(doc=3578,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.052020688 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.029633347 = queryNorm
        0.058186423 = fieldWeight in 3578, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0234375 = fieldNorm(doc=3578)
    0.012710081 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 3578) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.012710081 = score(doc=3578,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.08963835 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
          0.029633347 = queryNorm
        0.1417929 = fieldWeight in 3578, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0234375 = fieldNorm(doc=3578)
  0.21428572 = coord(3/14)
    Content
    INHALT: Chris Biemann/Rainer Osswald: Automatische Erweiterung eines semantikbasierten Lexikons durch Bootstrapping auf großen Korpora - Ernesto William De Luca/Andreas Nürnberger: Supporting Mobile Web Search by Ontology-based Categorization - Rüdiger Gleim: HyGraph - Ein Framework zur Extraktion, Repräsentation und Analyse webbasierter Hypertextstrukturen - Felicitas Haas/Bernhard Schröder: Freges Grundgesetze der Arithmetik: Dokumentbaum und Formelwald - Ulrich Held/ Andre Blessing/Bettina Säuberlich/Jürgen Sienel/Horst Rößler/Dieter Kopp: A personalized multimodal news service -Jürgen Hermes/Christoph Benden: Fusion von Annotation und Präprozessierung als Vorschlag zur Behebung des Rohtextproblems - Sonja Hüwel/Britta Wrede/Gerhard Sagerer: Semantisches Parsing mit Frames für robuste multimodale Mensch-Maschine-Kommunikation - Brigitte Krenn/Stefan Evert: Separating the wheat from the chaff- Corpus-driven evaluation of statistical association measures for collocation extraction - Jörn Kreutel: An application-centered Perspective an Multimodal Dialogue Systems - Jonas Kuhn: An Architecture for Prallel Corpusbased Grammar Learning - Thomas Mandl/Rene Schneider/Pia Schnetzler/Christa Womser-Hacker: Evaluierung von Systemen für die Eigennamenerkennung im crosslingualen Information Retrieval - Alexander Mehler/Matthias Dehmer/Rüdiger Gleim: Zur Automatischen Klassifikation von Webgenres - Charlotte Merz/Martin Volk: Requirements for a Parallel Treebank Search Tool - Sally YK. Mok: Multilingual Text Retrieval an the Web: The Case of a Cantonese-Dagaare-English Trilingual e-Lexicon -
    Darja Mönke: Ein Parser für natürlichsprachlich formulierte mathematische Beweise - Martin Müller: Ontologien für mathematische Beweistexte - Moritz Neugebauer: The status of functional phonological classification in statistical speech recognition - Uwe Quasthoff: Kookkurrenzanalyse und korpusbasierte Sachgruppenlexikographie - Reinhard Rapp: On the Relationship between Word Frequency and Word Familiarity - Ulrich Schade/Miloslaw Frey/Sebastian Becker: Computerlinguistische Anwendungen zur Verbesserung der Kommunikation zwischen militärischen Einheiten und deren Führungsinformationssystemen - David Schlangen/Thomas Hanneforth/Manfred Stede: Weaving the Semantic Web: Extracting and Representing the Content of Pathology Reports - Thomas Schmidt: Modellbildung und Modellierungsparadigmen in der computergestützten Korpuslinguistik - Sabine Schröder/Martina Ziefle: Semantic transparency of cellular phone menus - Thorsten Trippel/Thierry Declerck/Ulrich Held: Standardisierung von Sprachressourcen: Der aktuelle Stand - Charlotte Wollermann: Evaluation der audiovisuellen Kongruenz bei der multimodalen Sprachsynsthese - Claudia Kunze/Lothar Lemnitzer: Anwendungen des GermaNet II: Einleitung - Claudia Kunze/Lothar Lemnitzer: Die Zukunft der Wortnetze oder die Wortnetze der Zukunft - ein Roadmap-Beitrag -
  18. Rapke, K.: Automatische Indexierung von Volltexten für die Gruner+Jahr Pressedatenbank (2001) 0.01 
    0.007154687 = product of:
  0.050082806 = sum of:
    0.0060537956 = weight(_text_:information in 6386) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0060537956 = score(doc=6386,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.052020688 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.029633347 = queryNorm
        0.116372846 = fieldWeight in 6386, 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=6386)
    0.044029012 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 6386) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.044029012 = score(doc=6386,freq=12.0), product of:
        0.08963835 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
          0.029633347 = queryNorm
        0.49118498 = fieldWeight in 6386, product of:
          3.4641016 = tf(freq=12.0), with freq of:
            12.0 = termFreq=12.0
          3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=6386)
  0.14285715 = coord(2/14)
    Abstract
    Retrieval Tests sind die anerkannteste Methode, um neue Verfahren der Inhaltserschließung gegenüber traditionellen Verfahren zu rechtfertigen. Im Rahmen einer Diplomarbeit wurden zwei grundsätzlich unterschiedliche Systeme der automatischen inhaltlichen Erschließung anhand der Pressedatenbank des Verlagshauses Gruner + Jahr (G+J) getestet und evaluiert. Untersucht wurde dabei natürlichsprachliches Retrieval im Vergleich zu Booleschem Retrieval. Bei den beiden Systemen handelt es sich zum einen um Autonomy von Autonomy Inc. und DocCat, das von IBM an die Datenbankstruktur der G+J Pressedatenbank angepasst wurde. Ersteres ist ein auf natürlichsprachlichem Retrieval basierendes, probabilistisches System. DocCat demgegenüber basiert auf Booleschem Retrieval und ist ein lernendes System, das auf Grund einer intellektuell erstellten Trainingsvorlage indexiert. Methodisch geht die Evaluation vom realen Anwendungskontext der Textdokumentation von G+J aus. Die Tests werden sowohl unter statistischen wie auch qualitativen Gesichtspunkten bewertet. Ein Ergebnis der Tests ist, dass DocCat einige Mängel gegenüber der intellektuellen Inhaltserschließung aufweist, die noch behoben werden müssen, während das natürlichsprachliche Retrieval von Autonomy in diesem Rahmen und für die speziellen Anforderungen der G+J Textdokumentation so nicht einsetzbar ist
    Source
    nfd Information - Wissenschaft und Praxis. 52(2001) H.5, S.251-262
  19. Granitzer, M.: Statistische Verfahren der Textanalyse (2006) 0.01 
    0.0070486804 = product of:
  0.049340762 = sum of:
    0.042278 = weight(_text_:web in 5809) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.042278 = score(doc=5809,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.09670874 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
          0.029633347 = queryNorm
        0.43716836 = fieldWeight in 5809, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=5809)
    0.0070627616 = weight(_text_:information in 5809) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0070627616 = score(doc=5809,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.052020688 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.029633347 = queryNorm
        0.13576832 = fieldWeight in 5809, 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=5809)
  0.14285715 = coord(2/14)
    Abstract
    Der vorliegende Artikel bietet einen Überblick über statistische Verfahren der Textanalyse im Kontext des Semantic Webs. Als Einleitung erfolgt die Diskussion von Methoden und gängigen Techniken zur Vorverarbeitung von Texten wie z. B. Stemming oder Part-of-Speech Tagging. Die so eingeführten Repräsentationsformen dienen als Basis für statistische Merkmalsanalysen sowie für weiterführende Techniken wie Information Extraction und maschinelle Lernverfahren. Die Darstellung dieser speziellen Techniken erfolgt im Überblick, wobei auf die wichtigsten Aspekte in Bezug auf das Semantic Web detailliert eingegangen wird. Die Anwendung der vorgestellten Techniken zur Erstellung und Wartung von Ontologien sowie der Verweis auf weiterführende Literatur bilden den Abschluss dieses Artikels.
    Source
    Semantic Web: Wege zur vernetzten Wissensgesellschaft. Hrsg.: T. Pellegrini, u. A. Blumauer
    Theme
    Semantic Web
  20. Chen, K.-H.: Evaluating Chinese text retrieval with multilingual queries (2002) 0.01 
    0.007000556 = product of:
  0.04900389 = sum of:
    0.0070627616 = weight(_text_:information in 1851) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0070627616 = score(doc=1851,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.052020688 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.029633347 = queryNorm
        0.13576832 = fieldWeight in 1851, 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=1851)
    0.04194113 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 1851) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.04194113 = score(doc=1851,freq=8.0), product of:
        0.08963835 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
          0.029633347 = queryNorm
        0.46789268 = fieldWeight in 1851, product of:
          2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
            8.0 = termFreq=8.0
          3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=1851)
  0.14285715 = coord(2/14)
    Abstract
    This paper reports the design of a Chinese test collection with multilingual queries and the application of this test collection to evaluate information retrieval Systems. The effective indexing units, IR models, translation techniques, and query expansion for Chinese text retrieval are identified. The collaboration of East Asian countries for construction of test collections for cross-language multilingual text retrieval is also discussed in this paper. As well, a tool is designed to help assessors judge relevante and gather the events of relevante judgment. The log file created by this tool will be used to analyze the behaviors of assessors in the future.

Authors

Languages

  • e 136
  • d 39
  • m 2
  • ru 2
  • slv 1
  • More… Less…

Types

  • a 155
  • m 15
  • s 8
  • el 6
  • x 5
  • More… Less…

Themes

Subjects

Classifications