-
Hotho, A.; Bloehdorn, S.: Data Mining 2004 : Text classification by boosting weak learners based on terms and concepts (2004)
0.14
0.14009488 = sum of:
0.062422123 = product of:
0.24968849 = sum of:
0.24968849 = weight(_text_:3a in 562) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.24968849 = score(doc=562,freq=2.0), product of:
0.44427133 = queryWeight, product of:
8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
0.052402776 = queryNorm
0.56201804 = fieldWeight in 562, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=562)
0.25 = coord(1/4)
0.07767275 = sum of:
0.03507363 = weight(_text_:j in 562) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.03507363 = score(doc=562,freq=2.0), product of:
0.16650963 = queryWeight, product of:
3.1774964 = idf(docFreq=5010, maxDocs=44218)
0.052402776 = queryNorm
0.21064025 = fieldWeight in 562, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.1774964 = idf(docFreq=5010, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=562)
0.042599116 = weight(_text_:22 in 562) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.042599116 = score(doc=562,freq=2.0), product of:
0.1835056 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.052402776 = queryNorm
0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 562, 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=562)
- Content
- Vgl.: http://www.google.de/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=1&cad=rja&ved=0CEAQFjAA&url=http%3A%2F%2Fciteseerx.ist.psu.edu%2Fviewdoc%2Fdownload%3Fdoi%3D10.1.1.91.4940%26rep%3Drep1%26type%3Dpdf&ei=dOXrUMeIDYHDtQahsIGACg&usg=AFQjCNHFWVh6gNPvnOrOS9R3rkrXCNVD-A&sig2=5I2F5evRfMnsttSgFF9g7Q&bvm=bv.1357316858,d.Yms.
- Date
- 8. 1.2013 10:22:32
-
Hutchins, J.: From first conception to first demonstration : the nascent years of machine translation, 1947-1954. A chronology (1997)
0.06
0.06472729 = product of:
0.12945458 = sum of:
0.12945458 = sum of:
0.05845605 = weight(_text_:j in 1463) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.05845605 = score(doc=1463,freq=2.0), product of:
0.16650963 = queryWeight, product of:
3.1774964 = idf(docFreq=5010, maxDocs=44218)
0.052402776 = queryNorm
0.35106707 = fieldWeight in 1463, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.1774964 = idf(docFreq=5010, maxDocs=44218)
0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=1463)
0.07099853 = weight(_text_:22 in 1463) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.07099853 = score(doc=1463,freq=2.0), product of:
0.1835056 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.052402776 = queryNorm
0.38690117 = fieldWeight in 1463, 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=1463)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Date
- 31. 7.1996 9:22:19
-
Schwarz, C.: THESYS: Thesaurus Syntax System : a fully automatic thesaurus building aid (1988)
0.05
0.053783752 = product of:
0.107567504 = sum of:
0.107567504 = sum of:
0.057868537 = weight(_text_:j in 1361) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.057868537 = score(doc=1361,freq=4.0), product of:
0.16650963 = queryWeight, product of:
3.1774964 = idf(docFreq=5010, maxDocs=44218)
0.052402776 = queryNorm
0.34753868 = fieldWeight in 1361, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
3.1774964 = idf(docFreq=5010, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=1361)
0.049698967 = weight(_text_:22 in 1361) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.049698967 = score(doc=1361,freq=2.0), product of:
0.1835056 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.052402776 = queryNorm
0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 1361, 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=1361)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Date
- 6. 1.1999 10:22:07
- Source
- Wissensorganisation im Wandel: Dezimalklassifikation - Thesaurusfragen - Warenklassifikation. Proc. 11. Jahrestagung der Gesellschaft für Klassifikation, Aachen, 29.6.-1.7.1987. Hrsg.: H.-J. Hermes u. J. Hölzl
-
Bager, J.: ¬Die Text-KI ChatGPT schreibt Fachtexte, Prosa, Gedichte und Programmcode (2023)
0.05
0.051781833 = product of:
0.10356367 = sum of:
0.10356367 = sum of:
0.04676484 = weight(_text_:j in 835) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.04676484 = score(doc=835,freq=2.0), product of:
0.16650963 = queryWeight, product of:
3.1774964 = idf(docFreq=5010, maxDocs=44218)
0.052402776 = queryNorm
0.28085366 = fieldWeight in 835, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.1774964 = idf(docFreq=5010, maxDocs=44218)
0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=835)
0.056798823 = weight(_text_:22 in 835) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.056798823 = score(doc=835,freq=2.0), product of:
0.1835056 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.052402776 = queryNorm
0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 835, 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=835)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Date
- 29.12.2022 18:22:55
-
Godby, J.: WordSmith research project bridges gap between tokens and indexes (1998)
0.05
0.0453091 = product of:
0.0906182 = sum of:
0.0906182 = sum of:
0.040919233 = weight(_text_:j in 4729) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.040919233 = score(doc=4729,freq=2.0), product of:
0.16650963 = queryWeight, product of:
3.1774964 = idf(docFreq=5010, maxDocs=44218)
0.052402776 = queryNorm
0.24574696 = fieldWeight in 4729, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.1774964 = idf(docFreq=5010, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=4729)
0.049698967 = weight(_text_:22 in 4729) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.049698967 = score(doc=4729,freq=2.0), product of:
0.1835056 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.052402776 = queryNorm
0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 4729, 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=4729)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Source
- OCLC newsletter. 1998, no.234, Jul/Aug, S.22-24
-
Wu, H.; He, J.; Pei, Y.: Scientific impact at the topic level : a case study in computational linguistics (2010)
0.04
0.04151684 = sum of:
0.021057224 = product of:
0.084228896 = sum of:
0.084228896 = weight(_text_:authors in 4103) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.084228896 = score(doc=4103,freq=2.0), product of:
0.2388945 = queryWeight, product of:
4.558814 = idf(docFreq=1258, maxDocs=44218)
0.052402776 = queryNorm
0.35257778 = fieldWeight in 4103, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
4.558814 = idf(docFreq=1258, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=4103)
0.25 = coord(1/4)
0.020459617 = product of:
0.040919233 = sum of:
0.040919233 = weight(_text_:j in 4103) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.040919233 = score(doc=4103,freq=2.0), product of:
0.16650963 = queryWeight, product of:
3.1774964 = idf(docFreq=5010, maxDocs=44218)
0.052402776 = queryNorm
0.24574696 = fieldWeight in 4103, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.1774964 = idf(docFreq=5010, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=4103)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Abstract
- In this article, we propose to apply the topic model and topic-level eigenfactor (TEF) algorithm to assess the relative importance of academic entities including articles, authors, journals, and conferences. Scientific impact is measured by the biased PageRank score toward topics created by the latent topic model. The TEF metric considers the impact of an academic entity in multiple granular views as well as in a global view. Experiments on a computational linguistics corpus show that the method is a useful and promising measure to assess scientific impact.
-
Deventer, J.P. van; Kruger, C.J.; Johnson, R.D.: Delineating knowledge management through lexical analysis : a retrospective (2015)
0.04
0.04028083 = sum of:
0.02785609 = product of:
0.11142436 = sum of:
0.11142436 = weight(_text_:authors in 3807) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.11142436 = score(doc=3807,freq=14.0), product of:
0.2388945 = queryWeight, product of:
4.558814 = idf(docFreq=1258, maxDocs=44218)
0.052402776 = queryNorm
0.46641657 = fieldWeight in 3807, product of:
3.7416575 = tf(freq=14.0), with freq of:
14.0 = termFreq=14.0
4.558814 = idf(docFreq=1258, maxDocs=44218)
0.02734375 = fieldNorm(doc=3807)
0.25 = coord(1/4)
0.012424742 = product of:
0.024849484 = sum of:
0.024849484 = weight(_text_:22 in 3807) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.024849484 = score(doc=3807,freq=2.0), product of:
0.1835056 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.052402776 = queryNorm
0.1354154 = fieldWeight in 3807, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.02734375 = fieldNorm(doc=3807)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Abstract
- Purpose Academic authors tend to define terms that meet their own needs. Knowledge Management (KM) is a term that comes to mind and is examined in this study. Lexicographical research identified KM terms used by authors from 1996 to 2006 in academic outlets to define KM. Data were collected based on strict criteria which included that definitions should be unique instances. From 2006 onwards, these authors could not identify new unique instances of definitions with repetitive usage of such definition instances. Analysis revealed that KM is directly defined by People (Person and Organisation), Processes (Codify, Share, Leverage, and Process) and Contextualised Content (Information). The paper aims to discuss these issues. Design/methodology/approach The aim of this paper is to add to the body of knowledge in the KM discipline and supply KM practitioners and scholars with insight into what is commonly regarded to be KM so as to reignite the debate on what one could consider as KM. The lexicon used by KM scholars was evaluated though the application of lexicographical research methods as extended though Knowledge Discovery and Text Analysis methods. Findings By simplifying term relationships through the application of lexicographical research methods, as extended though Knowledge Discovery and Text Analysis methods, it was found that KM is directly defined by People (Person and Organisation), Processes (Codify, Share, Leverage, Process) and Contextualised Content (Information). One would therefore be able to indicate that KM, from an academic point of view, refers to people processing contextualised content.
Research limitations/implications In total, 42 definitions were identified spanning a period of 11 years. This represented the first use of KM through the estimated apex of terms used. From 2006 onwards definitions were used in repetition, and all definitions that were considered to repeat were therefore subsequently excluded as not being unique instances. All definitions listed are by no means complete and exhaustive. The definitions are viewed outside the scope and context in which they were originally formulated and then used to review the key concepts in the definitions themselves. Social implications When the authors refer to the aforementioned discussion of KM content as well as the presentation of the method followed in this paper, the authors may have a few implications for future research in KM. First the research validates ideas presented by the OECD in 2005 pertaining to KM. It also validates that through the evolution of KM, the authors ended with a description of KM that may be seen as a standardised description. If the authors as academics and practitioners, for example, refer to KM as the same construct and/or idea, it has the potential to speculatively, distinguish between what KM may or may not be. Originality/value By simplifying the term used to define KM, by focusing on the most common definitions, the paper assist in refocusing KM by reconsidering the dimensions that is the most common in how it has been defined over time. This would hopefully assist in reigniting discussions about KM and how it may be used to the benefit of an organisation.
- Date
- 20. 1.2015 18:30:22
-
Lawrie, D.; Mayfield, J.; McNamee, P.; Oard, P.W.: Cross-language person-entity linking from 20 languages (2015)
0.04
0.038836375 = product of:
0.07767275 = sum of:
0.07767275 = sum of:
0.03507363 = weight(_text_:j in 1848) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.03507363 = score(doc=1848,freq=2.0), product of:
0.16650963 = queryWeight, product of:
3.1774964 = idf(docFreq=5010, maxDocs=44218)
0.052402776 = queryNorm
0.21064025 = fieldWeight in 1848, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.1774964 = idf(docFreq=5010, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1848)
0.042599116 = weight(_text_:22 in 1848) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.042599116 = score(doc=1848,freq=2.0), product of:
0.1835056 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.052402776 = queryNorm
0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 1848, 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=1848)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Abstract
- The goal of entity linking is to associate references to an entity that is found in unstructured natural language content to an authoritative inventory of known entities. This article describes the construction of 6 test collections for cross-language person-entity linking that together span 22 languages. Fully automated components were used together with 2 crowdsourced validation stages to affordably generate ground-truth annotations with an accuracy comparable to that of a completely manual process. The resulting test collections each contain between 642 (Arabic) and 2,361 (Romanian) person references in non-English texts for which the correct resolution in English Wikipedia is known, plus a similar number of references for which no correct resolution into English Wikipedia is believed to exist. Fully automated cross-language person-name linking experiments with 20 non-English languages yielded a resolution accuracy of between 0.84 (Serbian) and 0.98 (Romanian), which compares favorably with previously reported cross-language entity linking results for Spanish.
-
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)
0.04
0.037594143 = sum of:
0.010528612 = product of:
0.042114448 = sum of:
0.042114448 = weight(_text_:authors in 5089) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.042114448 = score(doc=5089,freq=2.0), product of:
0.2388945 = queryWeight, product of:
4.558814 = idf(docFreq=1258, maxDocs=44218)
0.052402776 = queryNorm
0.17628889 = fieldWeight in 5089, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
4.558814 = idf(docFreq=1258, maxDocs=44218)
0.02734375 = fieldNorm(doc=5089)
0.25 = coord(1/4)
0.02706553 = product of:
0.05413106 = sum of:
0.05413106 = weight(_text_:j in 5089) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.05413106 = score(doc=5089,freq=14.0), product of:
0.16650963 = queryWeight, product of:
3.1774964 = idf(docFreq=5010, maxDocs=44218)
0.052402776 = queryNorm
0.32509267 = fieldWeight in 5089, product of:
3.7416575 = tf(freq=14.0), with freq of:
14.0 = termFreq=14.0
3.1774964 = idf(docFreq=5010, maxDocs=44218)
0.02734375 = fieldNorm(doc=5089)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- 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)
-
Lu, C.; Bu, Y.; Wang, J.; Ding, Y.; Torvik, V.; Schnaars, M.; Zhang, C.: Examining scientific writing styles from the perspective of linguistic complexity : a cross-level moderation model (2019)
0.04
0.035585865 = sum of:
0.018049048 = product of:
0.07219619 = sum of:
0.07219619 = weight(_text_:authors in 5219) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.07219619 = score(doc=5219,freq=2.0), product of:
0.2388945 = queryWeight, product of:
4.558814 = idf(docFreq=1258, maxDocs=44218)
0.052402776 = queryNorm
0.30220953 = fieldWeight in 5219, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
4.558814 = idf(docFreq=1258, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=5219)
0.25 = coord(1/4)
0.017536815 = product of:
0.03507363 = sum of:
0.03507363 = weight(_text_:j in 5219) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.03507363 = score(doc=5219,freq=2.0), product of:
0.16650963 = queryWeight, product of:
3.1774964 = idf(docFreq=5010, maxDocs=44218)
0.052402776 = queryNorm
0.21064025 = fieldWeight in 5219, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.1774964 = idf(docFreq=5010, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=5219)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Abstract
- Publishing articles in high-impact English journals is difficult for scholars around the world, especially for non-native English-speaking scholars (NNESs), most of whom struggle with proficiency in English. To uncover the differences in English scientific writing between native English-speaking scholars (NESs) and NNESs, we collected a large-scale data set containing more than 150,000 full-text articles published in PLoS between 2006 and 2015. We divided these articles into three groups according to the ethnic backgrounds of the first and corresponding authors, obtained by Ethnea, and examined the scientific writing styles in English from a two-fold perspective of linguistic complexity: (a) syntactic complexity, including measurements of sentence length and sentence complexity; and (b) lexical complexity, including measurements of lexical diversity, lexical density, and lexical sophistication. The observations suggest marginal differences between groups in syntactical and lexical complexity.
-
Sienel, J.; Weiss, M.; Laube, M.: Sprachtechnologien für die Informationsgesellschaft des 21. Jahrhunderts (2000)
0.03
0.032363646 = product of:
0.06472729 = sum of:
0.06472729 = sum of:
0.029228024 = weight(_text_:j in 5557) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.029228024 = score(doc=5557,freq=2.0), product of:
0.16650963 = queryWeight, product of:
3.1774964 = idf(docFreq=5010, maxDocs=44218)
0.052402776 = queryNorm
0.17553353 = fieldWeight in 5557, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.1774964 = idf(docFreq=5010, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=5557)
0.035499264 = weight(_text_:22 in 5557) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.035499264 = score(doc=5557,freq=2.0), product of:
0.1835056 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.052402776 = queryNorm
0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 5557, 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=5557)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Date
- 26.12.2000 13:22:17
-
Luo, L.; Ju, J.; Li, Y.-F.; Haffari, G.; Xiong, B.; Pan, S.: ChatRule: mining logical rules with large language models for knowledge graph reasoning (2023)
0.03
0.032363646 = product of:
0.06472729 = sum of:
0.06472729 = sum of:
0.029228024 = weight(_text_:j in 1171) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.029228024 = score(doc=1171,freq=2.0), product of:
0.16650963 = queryWeight, product of:
3.1774964 = idf(docFreq=5010, maxDocs=44218)
0.052402776 = queryNorm
0.17553353 = fieldWeight in 1171, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.1774964 = idf(docFreq=5010, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1171)
0.035499264 = weight(_text_:22 in 1171) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.035499264 = score(doc=1171,freq=2.0), product of:
0.1835056 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.052402776 = queryNorm
0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 1171, 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=1171)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Date
- 23.11.2023 19:07:22
-
Noever, D.; Ciolino, M.: ¬The Turing deception (2022)
0.03
0.031211061 = product of:
0.062422123 = sum of:
0.062422123 = product of:
0.24968849 = sum of:
0.24968849 = weight(_text_:3a in 862) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.24968849 = score(doc=862,freq=2.0), product of:
0.44427133 = queryWeight, product of:
8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
0.052402776 = queryNorm
0.56201804 = fieldWeight in 862, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=862)
0.25 = coord(1/4)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Source
- https%3A%2F%2Farxiv.org%2Fabs%2F2212.06721&usg=AOvVaw3i_9pZm9y_dQWoHi6uv0EN
-
Patrick, J.; Zhang, J.; Artola-Zubillaga, X.: ¬An architecture and query language for a federation of heterogeneous dictionary databases (2000)
0.03
0.028934268 = product of:
0.057868537 = sum of:
0.057868537 = product of:
0.11573707 = sum of:
0.11573707 = weight(_text_:j in 339) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.11573707 = score(doc=339,freq=4.0), product of:
0.16650963 = queryWeight, product of:
3.1774964 = idf(docFreq=5010, maxDocs=44218)
0.052402776 = queryNorm
0.69507736 = fieldWeight in 339, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
3.1774964 = idf(docFreq=5010, maxDocs=44218)
0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=339)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
-
Warner, A.J.: Natural language processing (1987)
0.03
0.028399412 = product of:
0.056798823 = sum of:
0.056798823 = product of:
0.11359765 = sum of:
0.11359765 = weight(_text_:22 in 337) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.11359765 = score(doc=337,freq=2.0), product of:
0.1835056 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.052402776 = queryNorm
0.61904186 = fieldWeight in 337, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.125 = fieldNorm(doc=337)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Source
- Annual review of information science and technology. 22(1987), S.79-108
-
Yang, C.C.; Luk, J.: Automatic generation of English/Chinese thesaurus based on a parallel corpus in laws (2003)
0.03
0.026891876 = product of:
0.053783752 = sum of:
0.053783752 = sum of:
0.028934268 = weight(_text_:j in 1616) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.028934268 = score(doc=1616,freq=4.0), product of:
0.16650963 = queryWeight, product of:
3.1774964 = idf(docFreq=5010, maxDocs=44218)
0.052402776 = queryNorm
0.17376934 = fieldWeight in 1616, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
3.1774964 = idf(docFreq=5010, maxDocs=44218)
0.02734375 = fieldNorm(doc=1616)
0.024849484 = weight(_text_:22 in 1616) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.024849484 = score(doc=1616,freq=2.0), product of:
0.1835056 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.052402776 = queryNorm
0.1354154 = fieldWeight in 1616, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.02734375 = fieldNorm(doc=1616)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Abstract
- The information available in languages other than English in the World Wide Web is increasing significantly. According to a report from Computer Economics in 1999, 54% of Internet users are English speakers ("English Will Dominate Web for Only Three More Years," Computer Economics, July 9, 1999, http://www.computereconomics. com/new4/pr/pr990610.html). However, it is predicted that there will be only 60% increase in Internet users among English speakers verses a 150% growth among nonEnglish speakers for the next five years. By 2005, 57% of Internet users will be non-English speakers. A report by CNN.com in 2000 showed that the number of Internet users in China had been increased from 8.9 million to 16.9 million from January to June in 2000 ("Report: China Internet users double to 17 million," CNN.com, July, 2000, http://cnn.org/2000/TECH/computing/07/27/ china.internet.reut/index.html). According to Nielsen/ NetRatings, there was a dramatic leap from 22.5 millions to 56.6 millions Internet users from 2001 to 2002. China had become the second largest global at-home Internet population in 2002 (US's Internet population was 166 millions) (Robyn Greenspan, "China Pulls Ahead of Japan," Internet.com, April 22, 2002, http://cyberatias.internet.com/big-picture/geographics/article/0,,5911_1013841,00. html). All of the evidences reveal the importance of crosslingual research to satisfy the needs in the near future. Digital library research has been focusing in structural and semantic interoperability in the past. Searching and retrieving objects across variations in protocols, formats and disciplines are widely explored (Schatz, B., & Chen, H. (1999). Digital libraries: technological advances and social impacts. IEEE Computer, Special Issue an Digital Libraries, February, 32(2), 45-50.; Chen, H., Yen, J., & Yang, C.C. (1999). International activities: development of Asian digital libraries. IEEE Computer, Special Issue an Digital Libraries, 32(2), 48-49.). However, research in crossing language boundaries, especially across European languages and Oriental languages, is still in the initial stage. In this proposal, we put our focus an cross-lingual semantic interoperability by developing automatic generation of a cross-lingual thesaurus based an English/Chinese parallel corpus. When the searchers encounter retrieval problems, Professional librarians usually consult the thesaurus to identify other relevant vocabularies. In the problem of searching across language boundaries, a cross-lingual thesaurus, which is generated by co-occurrence analysis and Hopfield network, can be used to generate additional semantically relevant terms that cannot be obtained from dictionary. In particular, the automatically generated cross-lingual thesaurus is able to capture the unknown words that do not exist in a dictionary, such as names of persons, organizations, and events. Due to Hong Kong's unique history background, both English and Chinese are used as official languages in all legal documents. Therefore, English/Chinese cross-lingual information retrieval is critical for applications in courts and the government. In this paper, we develop an automatic thesaurus by the Hopfield network based an a parallel corpus collected from the Web site of the Department of Justice of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region (HKSAR) Government. Experiments are conducted to measure the precision and recall of the automatic generated English/Chinese thesaurus. The result Shows that such thesaurus is a promising tool to retrieve relevant terms, especially in the language that is not the same as the input term. The direct translation of the input term can also be retrieved in most of the cases.
-
McMahon, J.G.; Smith, F.J.: Improved statistical language model performance with automatic generated word hierarchies (1996)
0.02
0.024849484 = product of:
0.049698967 = sum of:
0.049698967 = product of:
0.099397935 = sum of:
0.099397935 = weight(_text_:22 in 3164) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.099397935 = score(doc=3164,freq=2.0), product of:
0.1835056 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.052402776 = queryNorm
0.5416616 = fieldWeight in 3164, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=3164)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Source
- Computational linguistics. 22(1996) no.2, S.217-248
-
Ruge, G.: ¬A spreading activation network for automatic generation of thesaurus relationships (1991)
0.02
0.024849484 = product of:
0.049698967 = sum of:
0.049698967 = product of:
0.099397935 = sum of:
0.099397935 = weight(_text_:22 in 4506) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.099397935 = score(doc=4506,freq=2.0), product of:
0.1835056 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.052402776 = queryNorm
0.5416616 = fieldWeight in 4506, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=4506)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Date
- 8.10.2000 11:52:22
-
Somers, H.: Example-based machine translation : Review article (1999)
0.02
0.024849484 = product of:
0.049698967 = sum of:
0.049698967 = product of:
0.099397935 = sum of:
0.099397935 = weight(_text_:22 in 6672) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.099397935 = score(doc=6672,freq=2.0), product of:
0.1835056 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.052402776 = queryNorm
0.5416616 = fieldWeight in 6672, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=6672)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Date
- 31. 7.1996 9:22:19
-
New tools for human translators (1997)
0.02
0.024849484 = product of:
0.049698967 = sum of:
0.049698967 = product of:
0.099397935 = sum of:
0.099397935 = weight(_text_:22 in 1179) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.099397935 = score(doc=1179,freq=2.0), product of:
0.1835056 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.052402776 = queryNorm
0.5416616 = fieldWeight in 1179, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=1179)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Date
- 31. 7.1996 9:22:19
