Search (158 results, page 1 of 8)

0.0156712 = product of:
  0.0313424 = sum of:
    0.020648992 = weight(_text_:digitale in 91) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.020648992 = score(doc=91,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.18114218 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.158747 = idf(docFreq=690, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0351136 = queryNorm
        0.11399328 = fieldWeight in 91, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          5.158747 = idf(docFreq=690, maxDocs=44218)
          0.015625 = fieldNorm(doc=91)
    0.010693408 = weight(_text_:information in 91) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.010693408 = score(doc=91,freq=40.0), product of:
        0.06164115 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0351136 = queryNorm
        0.1734784 = fieldWeight in 91, product of:
          6.3245554 = tf(freq=40.0), with freq of:
            40.0 = termFreq=40.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.015625 = fieldNorm(doc=91)
  0.5 = coord(2/4)

Abstract

Der vorliegende Band enthält Beiträge namhafter Autoren aus den Bereichen Informationswissenschaft, Computerlinguistik, Kommunikationswissenschaft, Bibliothekswesen und verwandten Fächern. Es werden sowohl aktuelle theoretische Themen behandelt, etwa zu Medientheorie und Internet, zum Verhältnis von Information und kulturellem Gedächtnis oder über Information im Museum, als auch praktische Anwendungen und Vorschläge gegeben, wie z.B. zur Automatischen Indexierung und zur Wissensrepräsentation.

Content

Inhalt: Information und Sprache und mehr - eine Einleitung - Information und Kommunikation Wolf Rauch: Auch Information ist eine Tochter der Zeit Winfried Lenders: Information und kulturelles Gedächtnis Rainer Hammwöhner: Anmerkungen zur Grundlegung der Informationsethik Hans W. Giessen: Ehrwürdig stille Informationen Gernot Wersig: Vereinheitlichte Medientheorie und ihre Sicht auf das Internet Johann Haller, Anja Rütten: Informationswissenschaft und Translationswissenschaft: Spielarten oder Schwestern? Rainer Kuhlen: In Richtung Summarizing für Diskurse in K3 Werner Schweibenz: Sprache, Information und Bedeutung im Museum. Narrative Vermittlung durch Storytelling - Sprache und Computer, insbesondere Information Retrieval und Automatische Indexierung Manfred Thiel: Bedingt wahrscheinliche Syntaxbäume Jürgen Krause: Shell Model, Semantic Web and Web Information Retrieval Elisabeth Niggemann: Wer suchet, der findet? Verbesserung der inhaltlichen Suchmöglichkeiten im Informationssystem Der Deutschen Bibliothek Christa Womser-Hacker: Zur Rolle von Eigennamen im Cross-Language Information Retrieval Klaus-Dirk Schmitz: Wörterbuch, Thesaurus, Terminologie, Ontologie. Was tragen Terminologiewissenschaft und Informationswissenschaft zur Wissensordnung bei?
Jiri Panyr: Thesauri, Semantische Netze, Frames, Topic Maps, Taxonomien, Ontologien - begriffliche Verwirrung oder konzeptionelle Vielfalt? Heinz-Dieter Maas: Indexieren mit AUTINDEX Wilhelm Gaus, Rainer Kaluscha: Maschinelle inhaltliche Erschließung von Arztbriefen und Auswertung von Reha-Entlassungsberichten Klaus Lepsky: Automatische Indexierung des Reallexikons zur Deutschen Kunstgeschichte - Analysen und Entwicklungen Ilse Harms: Die computervermittelte Kommunikation als ein Instrument des Wissensmanagements in Organisationen August- Wilhelm Scheer, Dirk Werth: Geschäftsregel-basiertes Geschäftsprozessmanagement Thomas Seeger: Akkreditierung und Evaluierung von Hochschullehre und -forschung in Großbritannien. Hinweise für die Situation in Deutschland Bernd Hagenau: Gehabte Sorgen hab' ich gern? Ein Blick zurück auf die Deutschen Bibliothekartage 1975 bis 1980 - Persönliches Jorgo Chatzimarkakis: Sprache und Information in Europa Alfred Gulden: 7 Briefe und eine Anmerkung Günter Scholdt: Der Weg nach Europa im Spiegel von Mundartgedichten Alfred Guldens Wolfgang Müller: Prof. Dr. Harald H. Zimmermann - Seit 45 Jahren der Universität des Saarlandes verbunden Heinz-Dirk Luckhardt: Computerlinguistik und Informationswissenschaft: Facetten des wissenschaftlichen Wirkens von Harald H. Zimmermann Schriftenverzeichnis Harald H. Zimmermanns 1967-2005 - Projekte in Verantwortung von Harald H. Zimmermann - Adressen der Beiträgerinnen und Beiträger

Footnote

Rez. in Mitt. VÖB 59(2006) Nr.3, S.75-78 (O. Oberhauser): "Beim vorliegenden Buch handelt es sich um die Festschrift zum 65. Geburtstag des mit Ende des Sommersemesters 2006 in den Ruhestand getretenen Universitätsprofessors für Informationswissenschaft, Harald H. Zimmermann, jenes 1941 in Völklingen geborenen Computerlinguisten, der die Informationswissenschaft als akademische Disziplin in Deutschland mitbegründet und seit 1980 an der Universität des Saarlandes vertreten hat. Die insgesamt 26 Beiträge des von Professor Zimmermanns Mitarbeitern betreuten, optisch gediegen anmutenden Saur-Bandes gliedern sich - so das Inhaltsverzeichnis - in vier Themenschwerpunkte: - Information und Kommunikation - Sprache und Computer, insbesondere Information Retrieval und Automatische Indexierung - Analysen und Entwicklungen - Persönliches Die Aufsätze selbst variieren, wie bei Festschriften üblich bzw. unvermeidbar, hinsichtlich Länge, Stil, thematischem Detail und Anspruchsniveau. Neben wissenschaftlichen Beiträgen findet man hier auch Reminiszenzen und Literarisches. Die nachfolgende Auswahl zeigt, was mich selbst an diesem Buch interessiert hat:
In Information und kulturelles Gedächtnis (S. 7-15) plädiert der Kommunikationswissenschaftler Winfried Lenders (Bonn) dafür, Information nicht mit dem zu identifizieren, was heute als (kulturelles) Gedächtnis bezeichnet wird. Information ist ein Prozess bzw. Vorgang und kein manifestes Substrat; sie setzt aber ein solches Substrat, nämlich das im (kulturellen) Gedächtnis abgespeicherte Wissen, voraus. Allerdings führt nicht jedes Informieren zu einer Vermehrung des kulturellen Gedächtnisses - das notwendige Auswahlkriterium liegt jedoch nicht in der grundsätzliche Möglichkeit zum Speichern von Inhalten. Es liegt auch nicht ausschliesslich in formalisierten Aussonderungsmechanismen wie Skartieren, Zitationsindizes und Relevanzrangreihen, sondern in der gesellschaftlichen Kommunikation schlechthin. Auch an die Verfügbarkeit des Schriftlichen ist das kulturelle Gedächtnis nicht gebunden, zumal ja auch in Kulturen der Oralität gesellschaftlich Wichtiges aufbewahrt wird. Rainer Hammwöhner (Regensburg) geht in Anmerkungen zur Grundlegung der Informationsethik (S. 17-27) zunächst auf die "Überversorgung" des Informationssektors mit Spezialethiken ein, wobei er neben der (als breiter angesehenen) Informationsethik konkurrierende Bereichsethiken wie Medienethik, Computerethik und Netzethik/Cyberethik thematisiert und Überlappungen, Abgrenzung, Hierarchisierung etc. diskutiert. Versuche einer diskursethischen wie einer normenethischen Begründung der Informationsethik sind nach Hammwöhner zum Scheitern verurteilt, sodass er einen pragmatistischen Standpunkt einnimmt, wonach Informationsethik ganz einfach "die Analyse und Systematisierung der im Zusammenhang der digitalen Kommunikation etablierten normativen Handlungsmuster" zu leisten habe. In diesem Konnex werden Fragen wie jene nach dem Guten, aber auch Aspekte wie die Bewahrung des kulturellen Erbes für spätere Generationen und der Erhalt der kulturellen Mannigfaltigkeit angesprochen. Der Beitrag des vor kurzem verstorbenen Gründungsvaters der deutschen Informationswissenschaft, Gernot Wersig (Berlin), ist mit Vereinheitlichte Medientheorie und ihre Sicht auf das Internet (S. 35-46) überschrieben. Der Autor gibt darin einen kurzen Überblick über bisherige medientheoretische Ansätze und versucht sodann - ausgehend von den Werken Niklas Luhmanns und Herbert Stachowiaks - eine "vereinheitlichte Medientheorie" zu entwickeln. Dabei werden die Faktoren Kommunikation, Medien, Medienplattformen und -typologien, Medienevolution und schließlich die digitale Revolution diskutiert. Das Internet, so folgert Wersig, sei eine Medienplattform mit dem Potential, eine ganze Epoche zu gestalten. In Anlehnung an den bekannten Begriff "Gutenberg-Galaxis" spricht er hier auch von einer "Internet-Galaxie". Obwohl dieser Artikel viele interessante Gedanken enthält, erschließt er sich dem Leser leider nur schwer, da vieles vorausgesetzt wird und auch der gewählte Soziologenjargon nicht jedermanns Sache ist.
Mit automatischer Indexierung beschäftigen sich auch zwei weitere Beiträge. Indexieren mit AUTINDEX von H.-D. Mass (Saarbrücken) ist leider knapp und ohne didaktische Ambition verfasst, sodass man sich nicht wirklich vorstellen kann, wie dieses System funktioniert. Übersichtlicher stellt sich der Werkstattbericht Automatische Indexierung des Reallexikons zur deutschen Kunstgeschichte von K. Lepsky (Köln) dar, der zeigt, welche Probleme und Schritte bei der Digitalisierung, Indexierung und Web-Präsentation der Volltexte eines grossen fachlichen Nachschlagewerkes anfallen. Weitere interessante Beiträge befassen sich z.B. mit Summarizing-Leistungen im Rahmen eines e-Learning-Projektes (R. Kuhlen), mit dem Schalenmodell und dem Semantischen Web (J. Krause; aus nicht näher dargelegten Gründen in englischer Sprache) und mit der Akkreditierung/ Evaluierung von Hochschullehre und -forschung in Großbritannien (T. Seeger). In Summe liegt hier eine würdige Festschrift vor, über die sich der Gefeierte sicherlich gefreut haben wird. Für informationswissenschaftliche Spezialsammlungen und größere Bibliotheken ist der Band allemal eine Bereicherung. Ein Wermutstropfen aber doch: Obzwar mit Information und Sprache ein optisch ansprechend gestaltetes Buch produziert wurde, enthüllt eine nähere Betrachtung leider allzu viele Druckfehler, mangelhafte Worttrennungen, unkorrigierte grammatikalische Fehler, sowie auch Inkonsistenzen bei Kursivdruck und Satzzeichen. Lektoren und Korrektoren sind, so muss man wieder einmal schmerzlich zur Kenntnis nehmen, ein aussterbender Berufsstand."

RSWK

Information Retrieval / Aufsatzsammlung

Subject

Information Retrieval / Aufsatzsammlung

0.015486743 = product of:
  0.061946973 = sum of:
    0.061946973 = weight(_text_:digitale in 6814) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.061946973 = score(doc=6814,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.18114218 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.158747 = idf(docFreq=690, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0351136 = queryNorm
        0.34197983 = fieldWeight in 6814, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          5.158747 = idf(docFreq=690, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=6814)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Content

Darin. "Die Sprachwissenschaftlerin Christiane Fellbaum (dpa-Bild) wird ihr Preisgeld für das an der Berlin-Brandenburgischen Akademie der Wissenschaften zu erstellende "Digitale Wörterbuch der Deutschen Sprache des 20. Jahrhunderts" einsetzen. Sie setzt mit ihrem Computer dort an, wo konventionelle Wörterbücher nicht mehr mithalten können. Sie stellt per Knopfdruck Wortverbindungen her, die eine Sprache so reich an Bildern und Vorstellungen - und damit einzigartig - machen. Ihr elektronisches Lexikon aus über 500 Millionen Wörtern soll später als Datenbank zugänglich sein. Seine Grundlage ist die deutsche Sprache der vergangenen hundert Jahre - ein repräsentativer Querschnitt, zusammengestellt aus Literatur, Zeitungsdeutsch, Fachbuchsprache, Werbetexten und niedergeschriebener Umgangssprache. Wo ein Wörterbuch heute nur ein Wort mit Synonymen oder wenigen Verwendungsmöglichkeiten präsentiert, spannt die Forscherin ein riesiges Netz von Wortverbindungen. Bei Christiane Fellbaums Systematik heißt es beispielsweise nicht nur "verlieren", sondern auch noch "den Faden" oder "die Geduld" verlieren - samt allen möglichen weiteren Kombinationen, die der Computer wie eine Suchmaschine in seinen gespeicherten Texten findet."

0.005917717 = product of:
  0.023670867 = sum of:
    0.023670867 = weight(_text_:information in 4545) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.023670867 = score(doc=4545,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.06164115 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0351136 = queryNorm
        0.3840108 = fieldWeight in 4545, 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=4545)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Source

Journal of information science. 26(2000) no.2, S.75-85

0.005917717 = product of:
  0.023670867 = sum of:
    0.023670867 = weight(_text_:information in 6421) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.023670867 = score(doc=6421,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.06164115 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0351136 = 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)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Source

Information processing and management. 36(2000) no.1, S.155-205

0.005917717 = product of:
  0.023670867 = sum of:
    0.023670867 = weight(_text_:information in 3908) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.023670867 = score(doc=3908,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.06164115 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0351136 = 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)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Source

Information retrieval. 4(2001), S.209-230

0.0055355174 = product of:
  0.02214207 = sum of:
    0.02214207 = weight(_text_:information in 3840) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.02214207 = score(doc=3840,freq=14.0), product of:
        0.06164115 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0351136 = queryNorm
        0.3592092 = fieldWeight in 3840, product of:
          3.7416575 = tf(freq=14.0), with freq of:
            14.0 = termFreq=14.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=3840)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

Linguistics is the scientific study of language which emphasizes language spoken in everyday settings by human beings. It has a long history of interdisciplinarity, both internally and in contribution to other fields, including information science. A linguistic perspective is beneficial in many ways in information science, since it examines the relationship between the forms of meaningful expressions and their social, cognitive, institutional, and communicative context, these being two perspectives on information that are actively studied, to different degrees, in information science. Examples of issues relevant to information science are presented for which the approach taken under a linguistic perspective is illustrated.

Source

Encyclopedia of library and information sciences. 3rd ed. Ed.: M.J. Bates

0.005346704 = product of:
  0.021386815 = sum of:
    0.021386815 = weight(_text_:information in 3854) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.021386815 = score(doc=3854,freq=10.0), product of:
        0.06164115 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0351136 = queryNorm
        0.3469568 = fieldWeight in 3854, product of:
          3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
            10.0 = termFreq=10.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=3854)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

Natural language processing (NLP) is the computerized approach to analyzing text that is based on both a set of theories and a set of technologies. Although NLP is a relatively recent area of research and application, compared with other information technology approaches, there have been sufficient successes to date that suggest that NLP-based information access technologies will continue to be a major area of research and development in information systems now and into the future.

Source

Encyclopedia of library and information sciences. 3rd ed. Ed.: M.J. Bates

0.0050723287 = product of:
  0.020289315 = sum of:
    0.020289315 = weight(_text_:information in 6328) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.020289315 = score(doc=6328,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.06164115 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0351136 = 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)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Source

Journal of information science. 26(2000) no.6, S.429-451

0.0050723287 = product of:
  0.020289315 = sum of:
    0.020289315 = weight(_text_:information in 6501) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.020289315 = score(doc=6501,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.06164115 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0351136 = 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)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Source

Journal of information science. 26(2000) no.6, S.461-467

0.004744729 = product of:
  0.018978916 = sum of:
    0.018978916 = weight(_text_:information in 2557) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.018978916 = score(doc=2557,freq=14.0), product of:
        0.06164115 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0351136 = queryNorm
        0.3078936 = fieldWeight in 2557, product of:
          3.7416575 = tf(freq=14.0), with freq of:
            14.0 = termFreq=14.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2557)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

The field of natural language processing (NLP) demonstrates rapid changes in the design of information retrieval systems and human-computer interaction. While natural language is being looked on as the most effective tool for information retrieval in a contemporary information environment, the systems using it are only beginning to emerge. This study attempts to evaluate the current state of NLP information retrieval systems from the user's point of view: what techniques are used by these systems to guide their users through the search process? The analysis focused on the structure and components of the systems' help mechanisms. Results of the study demonstrated that systems which claimed to be using natural language searching in fact used a wide range of information retrieval techniques from real natural language processing to Boolean searching. As a result, the user assistance mechanisms of these systems also varied. While pseudo-NLP systems would suit a more traditional method of instruction, real NLP systems primarily utilised the methods of explanation and user-system dialogue.

Source

Online information review. 26(2002) no.1, S.30-39

0.004725863 = product of:
  0.018903453 = sum of:
    0.018903453 = weight(_text_:information in 5524) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.018903453 = score(doc=5524,freq=20.0), product of:
        0.06164115 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0351136 = queryNorm
        0.30666938 = fieldWeight in 5524, product of:
          4.472136 = tf(freq=20.0), with freq of:
            20.0 = termFreq=20.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=5524)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

The role of linguistics in information access, extraction and dissemination is essential. Radical changes in the techniques of information and communication at the end of the twentieth century have had a significant effect on the function of the linguistic paradigm and its applications in all forms of communication. The introduction of new technical means have deeply changed the possibilities for the distribution of information. In this situation, what is the role of the linguistic paradigm and its practical applications, i.e., natural language processing (NLP) techniques when applied to information access? What solutions can linguistics offer in human computer interaction, extraction and management? Many fields show the relevance of the linguistic paradigm through the various technologies that require NLP, such as document and message understanding, information detection, extraction, and retrieval, question and answer, cross-language information retrieval (CLIR), text summarization, filtering, and spoken document retrieval. This paper focuses on the central role of human language technologies in the information society, surveys the current situation, describes the benefits of the above mentioned applications, outlines successes and challenges, and discusses solutions. It reviews the resources and means needed to advance information access and dissemination across language boundaries in the twenty-first century. Multilingualism, which is a natural result of globalization, requires more effort in the direction of language technology. The scope of human language technology (HLT) is large, so we limit our review to applications that involve multilinguality.

Content

Beitrag eines Themenheftes "Knowledge organization and classification in international information retrieval"

0.0046303812 = product of:
  0.018521525 = sum of:
    0.018521525 = weight(_text_:information in 4283) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.018521525 = score(doc=4283,freq=30.0), product of:
        0.06164115 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0351136 = 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)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

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

0.00422694 = product of:
  0.01690776 = sum of:
    0.01690776 = weight(_text_:information in 4257) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.01690776 = score(doc=4257,freq=16.0), product of:
        0.06164115 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0351136 = 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)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

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]

0.00422694 = product of:
  0.01690776 = sum of:
    0.01690776 = weight(_text_:information in 3413) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.01690776 = score(doc=3413,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.06164115 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0351136 = queryNorm
        0.27429342 = fieldWeight in 3413, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=3413)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Source

Auf dem Weg zur Informationskultur: Wa(h)re Information? Festschrift für Norbert Henrichs zum 65. Geburtstag, Hrsg.: T.A. Schröder

0.004184458 = product of:
  0.016737832 = sum of:
    0.016737832 = weight(_text_:information in 4844) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.016737832 = score(doc=4844,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.06164115 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0351136 = queryNorm
        0.27153665 = fieldWeight in 4844, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=4844)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Source

Information processing and management. 36(2000) no.5, S.717-736

0.004184458 = product of:
  0.016737832 = sum of:
    0.016737832 = weight(_text_:information in 6301) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.016737832 = score(doc=6301,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.06164115 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0351136 = queryNorm
        0.27153665 = fieldWeight in 6301, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=6301)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Source

Information today. 17(2000) no.1, S.57

0.004184458 = product of:
  0.016737832 = sum of:
    0.016737832 = weight(_text_:information in 1854) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.016737832 = score(doc=1854,freq=8.0), product of:
        0.06164115 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0351136 = queryNorm
        0.27153665 = fieldWeight in 1854, 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=1854)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

A translation memory system is a new type of human language technology (HLT) tool that is gaining popularity among translators. Such tools allow translators to store previously translated texts in a type of aligned bilingual database, and to recycle relevant parts of these texts when producing new translations. Currently, these tools retrieve information from the database using superficial character string matching, which often results in poor precision and recall. This paper explains how translation memory systems work, and it considers some possible ways for introducing more sophisticated information retrieval techniques into such systems by taking syntactic and semantic similarity into account. Some of the suggested techniques are inspired by these used in other areas of HLT, and some by techniques used in information science.

0.004184458 = product of:
  0.016737832 = sum of:
    0.016737832 = weight(_text_:information in 4261) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.016737832 = score(doc=4261,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.06164115 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0351136 = queryNorm
        0.27153665 = fieldWeight in 4261, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=4261)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Source

Encyclopedia of library and information science. Vol.71, [=Suppl.34]

0.0041415393 = product of:
  0.016566157 = sum of:
    0.016566157 = weight(_text_:information in 1488) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.016566157 = score(doc=1488,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.06164115 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0351136 = queryNorm
        0.2687516 = fieldWeight in 1488, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=1488)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

Ontologies have become an important issue in research communities across several disciplines. This paper discusses some of the innovative techniques involving automatic terminology resources acquisition are briefly discussed. Suggests that NLP-based ontologies are useful in reducing the cost of ontology engineering. Emphasizes that linguistic ontologies covering both ontological and lexical information can offer solutions since they can be more easily updated by the resources of NLP products.

Source

Knowledge organization, information systems and other essays: Professor A. Neelameghan Festschrift. Ed. by K.S. Raghavan and K.N. Prasad

0.004010028 = product of:
  0.016040113 = sum of:
    0.016040113 = weight(_text_:information in 2502) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.016040113 = score(doc=2502,freq=10.0), product of:
        0.06164115 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0351136 = 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)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

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