Search (55 results, page 1 of 3)

  • × theme_ss:"Computerlinguistik"
  1. Hotho, A.; Bloehdorn, S.: Data Mining 2004 : Text classification by boosting weak learners based on terms and concepts (2004) 0.20 
    0.20235461 = product of:
  0.40470922 = sum of:
    0.34572536 = weight(_text_:3a in 562) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.34572536 = score(doc=562,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.6151499 = queryWeight, product of:
          8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
          0.072558284 = 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)
    0.05898387 = weight(_text_:22 in 562) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.05898387 = score(doc=562,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.25408673 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
          0.072558284 = 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)
  0.5 = coord(2/4)
    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
  2. Noever, D.; Ciolino, M.: ¬The Turing deception (2022) 0.09 
    0.08643134 = product of:
  0.34572536 = sum of:
    0.34572536 = weight(_text_:3a in 862) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.34572536 = score(doc=862,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.6151499 = queryWeight, product of:
          8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
          0.072558284 = 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)
    Source
    https%3A%2F%2Farxiv.org%2Fabs%2F2212.06721&usg=AOvVaw3i_9pZm9y_dQWoHi6uv0EN
  3. Yang, C.C.; Luk, J.: Automatic generation of English/Chinese thesaurus based on a parallel corpus in laws (2003) 0.06 
    0.05683583 = product of:
  0.11367166 = sum of:
    0.0792644 = weight(_text_:objects in 1616) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0792644 = score(doc=1616,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.38565242 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.315071 = idf(docFreq=590, maxDocs=44218)
          0.072558284 = queryNorm
        0.20553327 = fieldWeight in 1616, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          5.315071 = idf(docFreq=590, maxDocs=44218)
          0.02734375 = fieldNorm(doc=1616)
    0.034407258 = weight(_text_:22 in 1616) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.034407258 = score(doc=1616,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.25408673 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
          0.072558284 = 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(2/4)
    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.
  4. Sokirko, A.V.: Programnaya realizatsiya Russkogo abshchesemanticheskogo slovarya (1997) 0.06 
    0.056617435 = product of:
  0.22646974 = sum of:
    0.22646974 = weight(_text_:objects in 2258) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.22646974 = score(doc=2258,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.38565242 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.315071 = idf(docFreq=590, maxDocs=44218)
          0.072558284 = queryNorm
        0.58723795 = fieldWeight in 2258, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          5.315071 = idf(docFreq=590, maxDocs=44218)
          0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=2258)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)
    Abstract
    Discusses the Dolphi2 for Windows software which has been used for the development of the Russian Semantic Dictionay ROSS. Although not a relational database as such, Dolphi actively uses standard objects of relational databases
  5. Warner, A.J.: Natural language processing (1987) 0.04 
    0.03932258 = product of:
  0.15729032 = sum of:
    0.15729032 = weight(_text_:22 in 337) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.15729032 = score(doc=337,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.25408673 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
          0.072558284 = 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)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)
    Source
    Annual review of information science and technology. 22(1987), S.79-108
  6. McMahon, J.G.; Smith, F.J.: Improved statistical language model performance with automatic generated word hierarchies (1996) 0.03 
    0.034407258 = product of:
  0.13762903 = sum of:
    0.13762903 = weight(_text_:22 in 3164) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.13762903 = score(doc=3164,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.25408673 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
          0.072558284 = 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)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)
    Source
    Computational linguistics. 22(1996) no.2, S.217-248
  7. Ruge, G.: ¬A spreading activation network for automatic generation of thesaurus relationships (1991) 0.03 
    0.034407258 = product of:
  0.13762903 = sum of:
    0.13762903 = weight(_text_:22 in 4506) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.13762903 = score(doc=4506,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.25408673 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
          0.072558284 = 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)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)
    Date
    8.10.2000 11:52:22
  8. Somers, H.: Example-based machine translation : Review article (1999) 0.03 
    0.034407258 = product of:
  0.13762903 = sum of:
    0.13762903 = weight(_text_:22 in 6672) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.13762903 = score(doc=6672,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.25408673 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
          0.072558284 = 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)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)
    Date
    31. 7.1996 9:22:19
  9. New tools for human translators (1997) 0.03 
    0.034407258 = product of:
  0.13762903 = sum of:
    0.13762903 = weight(_text_:22 in 1179) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.13762903 = score(doc=1179,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.25408673 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
          0.072558284 = 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)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)
    Date
    31. 7.1996 9:22:19
  10. Baayen, R.H.; Lieber, H.: Word frequency distributions and lexical semantics (1997) 0.03 
    0.034407258 = product of:
  0.13762903 = sum of:
    0.13762903 = weight(_text_:22 in 3117) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.13762903 = score(doc=3117,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.25408673 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
          0.072558284 = queryNorm
        0.5416616 = fieldWeight in 3117, 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=3117)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)
    Date
    28. 2.1999 10:48:22
  11. ¬Der Student aus dem Computer (2023) 0.03 
    0.034407258 = product of:
  0.13762903 = sum of:
    0.13762903 = weight(_text_:22 in 1079) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.13762903 = score(doc=1079,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.25408673 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
          0.072558284 = queryNorm
        0.5416616 = fieldWeight in 1079, 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=1079)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)
    Date
    27. 1.2023 16:22:55
  12. Byrne, C.C.; McCracken, S.A.: ¬An adaptive thesaurus employing semantic distance, relational inheritance and nominal compound interpretation for linguistic support of information retrieval (1999) 0.03 
    0.029491935 = product of:
  0.11796774 = sum of:
    0.11796774 = weight(_text_:22 in 4483) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.11796774 = score(doc=4483,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.25408673 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
          0.072558284 = queryNorm
        0.46428138 = fieldWeight in 4483, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
          0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=4483)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)
    Date
    15. 3.2000 10:22:37
  13. Boleda, G.; Evert, S.: Multiword expressions : a pain in the neck of lexical semantics (2009) 0.03 
    0.029491935 = product of:
  0.11796774 = sum of:
    0.11796774 = weight(_text_:22 in 4888) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.11796774 = score(doc=4888,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.25408673 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
          0.072558284 = queryNorm
        0.46428138 = fieldWeight in 4888, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
          0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=4888)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)
    Date
    1. 3.2013 14:56:22
  14. Monnerjahn, P.: Vorsprung ohne Technik : Übersetzen: Computer und Qualität (2000) 0.03 
    0.029491935 = product of:
  0.11796774 = sum of:
    0.11796774 = weight(_text_:22 in 5429) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.11796774 = score(doc=5429,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.25408673 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
          0.072558284 = queryNorm
        0.46428138 = fieldWeight in 5429, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
          0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=5429)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)
    Source
    c't. 2000, H.22, S.230-231
  15. Needham, R.M.; Sparck Jones, K.: Keywords and clumps (1985) 0.03 
    0.0280242 = product of:
  0.1120968 = sum of:
    0.1120968 = weight(_text_:objects in 3645) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.1120968 = score(doc=3645,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.38565242 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.315071 = idf(docFreq=590, maxDocs=44218)
          0.072558284 = queryNorm
        0.29066795 = fieldWeight in 3645, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          5.315071 = idf(docFreq=590, maxDocs=44218)
          0.02734375 = fieldNorm(doc=3645)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)
    Abstract
    The selection that follows was chosen as it represents "a very early paper an the possibilities allowed by computers an documentation." In the early 1960s computers were being used to provide simple automatic indexing systems wherein keywords were extracted from documents. The problem with such systems was that they lacked vocabulary control, thus documents related in subject matter were not always collocated in retrieval. To improve retrieval by improving recall is the raison d'être of vocabulary control tools such as classifications and thesauri. The question arose whether it was possible by automatic means to construct classes of terms, which when substituted, one for another, could be used to improve retrieval performance? One of the first theoretical approaches to this question was initiated by R. M. Needham and Karen Sparck Jones at the Cambridge Language Research Institute in England.t The question was later pursued using experimental methodologies by Sparck Jones, who, as a Senior Research Associate in the Computer Laboratory at the University of Cambridge, has devoted her life's work to research in information retrieval and automatic naturai language processing. Based an the principles of numerical taxonomy, automatic classification techniques start from the premise that two objects are similar to the degree that they share attributes in common. When these two objects are keywords, their similarity is measured in terms of the number of documents they index in common. Step 1 in automatic classification is to compute mathematically the degree to which two terms are similar. Step 2 is to group together those terms that are "most similar" to each other, forming equivalence classes of intersubstitutable terms. The technique for forming such classes varies and is the factor that characteristically distinguishes different approaches to automatic classification. The technique used by Needham and Sparck Jones, that of clumping, is described in the selection that follows. Questions that must be asked are whether the use of automatically generated classes really does improve retrieval performance and whether there is a true eco nomic advantage in substituting mechanical for manual labor. Several years after her work with clumping, Sparck Jones was to observe that while it was not wholly satisfactory in itself, it was valuable in that it stimulated research into automatic classification. To this it might be added that it was valuable in that it introduced to libraryl information science the methods of numerical taxonomy, thus stimulating us to think again about the fundamental nature and purpose of classification. In this connection it might be useful to review how automatically derived classes differ from those of manually constructed classifications: 1) the manner of their derivation is purely a posteriori, the ultimate operationalization of the principle of literary warrant; 2) the relationship between members forming such classes is essentially statistical; the members of a given class are similar to each other not because they possess the class-defining characteristic but by virtue of sharing a family resemblance; and finally, 3) automatically derived classes are not related meaningfully one to another, that is, they are not ordered in traditional hierarchical and precedence relationships.
  16. Hutchins, J.: From first conception to first demonstration : the nascent years of machine translation, 1947-1954. A chronology (1997) 0.02 
    0.024576614 = product of:
  0.098306455 = sum of:
    0.098306455 = weight(_text_:22 in 1463) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.098306455 = score(doc=1463,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.25408673 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
          0.072558284 = 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)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)
    Date
    31. 7.1996 9:22:19
  17. Kuhlmann, U.; Monnerjahn, P.: Sprache auf Knopfdruck : Sieben automatische Übersetzungsprogramme im Test (2000) 0.02 
    0.024576614 = product of:
  0.098306455 = sum of:
    0.098306455 = weight(_text_:22 in 5428) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.098306455 = score(doc=5428,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.25408673 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
          0.072558284 = queryNorm
        0.38690117 = fieldWeight in 5428, 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=5428)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)
    Source
    c't. 2000, H.22, S.220-229
  18. Lezius, W.; Rapp, R.; Wettler, M.: ¬A morphology-system and part-of-speech tagger for German (1996) 0.02 
    0.024576614 = product of:
  0.098306455 = sum of:
    0.098306455 = weight(_text_:22 in 1693) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.098306455 = score(doc=1693,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.25408673 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
          0.072558284 = queryNorm
        0.38690117 = fieldWeight in 1693, 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=1693)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)
    Date
    22. 3.2015 9:37:18
  19. Jha, A.: Why GPT-4 isn't all it's cracked up to be (2023) 0.02 
    0.0198161 = product of:
  0.0792644 = sum of:
    0.0792644 = weight(_text_:objects in 923) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0792644 = score(doc=923,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.38565242 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.315071 = idf(docFreq=590, maxDocs=44218)
          0.072558284 = queryNorm
        0.20553327 = fieldWeight in 923, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          5.315071 = idf(docFreq=590, maxDocs=44218)
          0.02734375 = fieldNorm(doc=923)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)
    Abstract
    They might appear intelligent, but LLMs are nothing of the sort. They don't understand the meanings of the words they are using, nor the concepts expressed within the sentences they create. When asked how to bring a cow back to life, earlier versions of ChatGPT, for example, which ran on a souped-up version of GPT-3, would confidently provide a list of instructions. So-called hallucinations like this happen because language models have no concept of what a "cow" is or that "death" is a non-reversible state of being. LLMs do not have minds that can think about objects in the world and how they relate to each other. All they "know" is how likely it is that some sets of words will follow other sets of words, having calculated those probabilities from their training data. To make sense of all this, I spoke with Gary Marcus, an emeritus professor of psychology and neural science at New York University, for "Babbage", our science and technology podcast. Last year, as the world was transfixed by the sudden appearance of ChatGPT, he made some fascinating predictions about GPT-4.
  20. Wanner, L.: Lexical choice in text generation and machine translation (1996) 0.02 
    0.01966129 = product of:
  0.07864516 = sum of:
    0.07864516 = weight(_text_:22 in 8521) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.07864516 = score(doc=8521,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.25408673 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
          0.072558284 = queryNorm
        0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 8521, 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=8521)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)
    Date
    31. 7.1996 9:22:19

Authors

Years

Languages

  • e 38
  • d 16
  • ru 1
  • More… Less…

Types

  • a 42
  • el 6
  • m 5
  • s 3
  • p 2
  • x 2
  • d 1
  • More… Less…

Themes

Subjects

Classifications