Search (52 results, page 1 of 3)

0.013296565 = product of:
  0.02659313 = sum of:
    0.02659313 = product of:
      0.039889693 = sum of:
        0.008891728 = weight(_text_:a in 5011) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.008891728 = score(doc=5011,freq=14.0), product of:
            0.052761257 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.045758117 = queryNorm
            0.1685276 = fieldWeight in 5011, product of:
              3.7416575 = tf(freq=14.0), with freq of:
                14.0 = termFreq=14.0
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=5011)
        0.030997967 = weight(_text_:22 in 5011) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.030997967 = score(doc=5011,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.16023713 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.045758117 = queryNorm
            0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 5011, 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=5011)
      0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

The present challenge faced by scientists working with Big Data comes in the overwhelming volume and level of detail provided by current data sets. Exceeding traditional empirical approaches, Big Data opens a new perspective on scientific work in which data comes to play a role in the development of the scientific problematic to be developed. Addressing this reconfiguration of our relationship with data through readings of Wittgenstein, Macherey, and Popper, we propose a picture of science that encourages scientists to engage with the data in a direct way, using the data itself as an instrument for scientific investigation. Using GIS as a theme, we develop the concept of cyber-human systems of thought and understanding to bridge the divide between representative (theoretical) thinking and (non-theoretical) data-driven science. At the foundation of these systems, we invoke the concept of the "semantic pixel" to establish a logical and virtual space linking data and the work of scientists. It is with this discussion of the relationship between analysts in their pursuit of knowledge and the rise of Big Data that this present discussion of the philosophical foundations of Big Data addresses the central questions raised by social informatics research.

Date

7. 3.2019 16:32:22

Type

a

0.012837617 = product of:
  0.025675233 = sum of:
    0.025675233 = product of:
      0.03851285 = sum of:
        0.007514882 = weight(_text_:a in 668) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.007514882 = score(doc=668,freq=10.0), product of:
            0.052761257 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.045758117 = queryNorm
            0.14243183 = fieldWeight in 668, product of:
              3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
                10.0 = termFreq=10.0
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=668)
        0.030997967 = weight(_text_:22 in 668) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.030997967 = score(doc=668,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.16023713 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.045758117 = queryNorm
            0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 668, 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=668)
      0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

20th century massification of higher education and research in academia is said to have produced structurally stratified higher education systems in many countries. Most manifestly, the research mission of universities appears to be divisive. Authors have claimed that the Swedish system, while formally unified, has developed into a binary state, and statistics seem to support this conclusion. This article makes use of a comprehensive statistical data source on Swedish higher education institutions to illustrate stratification, and uses literature on Swedish research policy history to contextualize the statistics. Highlighting the opportunities as well as constraints of the data, the article argues that there is great merit in combining statistics with a qualitative analysis when studying the structural characteristics of national higher education systems. Not least the article shows that it is an over-simplification to describe the Swedish system as binary; the stratification is more complex. On basis of the analysis, the article also argues that while global trends certainly influence national developments, higher education systems have country-specific features that may enrich the understanding of how systems evolve and therefore should be analyzed as part of a broader study of the increasingly globalized academic system.

Date

22. 3.2013 19:43:01

Type

a

0.01257316 = product of:
  0.02514632 = sum of:
    0.02514632 = product of:
      0.03771948 = sum of:
        0.0067215143 = weight(_text_:a in 1605) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.0067215143 = score(doc=1605,freq=8.0), product of:
            0.052761257 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.045758117 = queryNorm
            0.12739488 = fieldWeight in 1605, product of:
              2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
                8.0 = termFreq=8.0
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1605)
        0.030997967 = weight(_text_:22 in 1605) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.030997967 = score(doc=1605,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.16023713 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.045758117 = queryNorm
            0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 1605, 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=1605)
      0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

Numerous studies have explored the possibility of uncovering information from web search queries but few have examined the factors that affect web query data sources. We conducted a study that investigated this issue by comparing Google Trends and Baidu Index. Data from these two services are based on queries entered by users into Google and Baidu, two of the largest search engines in the world. We first compared the features and functions of the two services based on documents and extensive testing. We then carried out an empirical study that collected query volume data from the two sources. We found that data from both sources could be used to predict the quality of Chinese universities and companies. Despite the differences between the two services in terms of technology, such as differing methods of language processing, the search volume data from the two were highly correlated and combining the two data sources did not improve the predictive power of the data. However, there was a major difference between the two in terms of data availability. Baidu Index was able to provide more search volume data than Google Trends did. Our analysis showed that the disadvantage of Google Trends in this regard was due to Google's smaller user base in China. The implication of this finding goes beyond China. Google's user bases in many countries are smaller than that in China, so the search volume data related to those countries could result in the same issue as that related to China.

Source

Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology. 66(2015) no.1, S.13-22

Type

a

0.010523799 = product of:
  0.021047598 = sum of:
    0.021047598 = product of:
      0.031571396 = sum of:
        0.0095056575 = weight(_text_:a in 3059) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.0095056575 = score(doc=3059,freq=16.0), product of:
            0.052761257 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.045758117 = queryNorm
            0.18016359 = fieldWeight in 3059, product of:
              4.0 = tf(freq=16.0), with freq of:
                16.0 = termFreq=16.0
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3059)
        0.022065736 = weight(_text_:h in 3059) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.022065736 = score(doc=3059,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.113683715 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.4844491 = idf(docFreq=10020, maxDocs=44218)
              0.045758117 = queryNorm
            0.1940976 = fieldWeight in 3059, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              2.4844491 = idf(docFreq=10020, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3059)
      0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

This study proposes a new method to construct and trace the trajectory of conceptual development of a research field by combining main path analysis, citation analysis, and text-mining techniques. Main path analysis, a method used commonly to trace the most critical path in a citation network, helps describe the developmental trajectory of a research field. This study extends the main path analysis method and applies text-mining techniques in the new method, which reflects the trajectory of conceptual development in an academic research field more accurately than citation frequency, which represents only the articles examined. Articles can be merged based on similarity of concepts, and by merging concepts the history of a research field can be described more precisely. The new method was applied to the "h-index" and "text mining" fields. The precision, recall, and F-measures of the h-index were 0.738, 0.652, and 0.658 and those of text-mining were 0.501, 0.653, and 0.551, respectively. Last, this study not only establishes the conceptual trajectory map of a research field, but also recommends keywords that are more precise than those used currently by researchers. These precise keywords could enable researchers to gather related works more quickly than before.

Type

a

0.010113914 = product of:
  0.020227827 = sum of:
    0.020227827 = product of:
      0.03034174 = sum of:
        0.0053772116 = weight(_text_:a in 4076) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.0053772116 = score(doc=4076,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.052761257 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.045758117 = queryNorm
            0.10191591 = fieldWeight in 4076, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=4076)
        0.02496453 = weight(_text_:h in 4076) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.02496453 = score(doc=4076,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.113683715 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.4844491 = idf(docFreq=10020, maxDocs=44218)
              0.045758117 = queryNorm
            0.21959636 = fieldWeight in 4076, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              2.4844491 = idf(docFreq=10020, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=4076)
      0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Type

a

0.010113914 = product of:
  0.020227827 = sum of:
    0.020227827 = product of:
      0.03034174 = sum of:
        0.0053772116 = weight(_text_:a in 673) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.0053772116 = score(doc=673,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.052761257 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.045758117 = queryNorm
            0.10191591 = fieldWeight in 673, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=673)
        0.02496453 = weight(_text_:h in 673) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.02496453 = score(doc=673,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.113683715 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.4844491 = idf(docFreq=10020, maxDocs=44218)
              0.045758117 = queryNorm
            0.21959636 = fieldWeight in 673, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              2.4844491 = idf(docFreq=10020, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=673)
      0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Source

027.7 Zeitschrift für Bibliothekskultur. 4(2016), H.2

Type

a

0.010043396 = product of:
  0.020086791 = sum of:
    0.020086791 = product of:
      0.030130185 = sum of:
        0.011406789 = weight(_text_:a in 3205) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.011406789 = score(doc=3205,freq=16.0), product of:
            0.052761257 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.045758117 = queryNorm
            0.2161963 = fieldWeight in 3205, product of:
              4.0 = tf(freq=16.0), with freq of:
                16.0 = termFreq=16.0
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=3205)
        0.018723397 = weight(_text_:h in 3205) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.018723397 = score(doc=3205,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.113683715 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.4844491 = idf(docFreq=10020, maxDocs=44218)
              0.045758117 = queryNorm
            0.16469726 = fieldWeight in 3205, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              2.4844491 = idf(docFreq=10020, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=3205)
      0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

The goal of Open Knowledge Maps is to create a visual interface to the world's scientific knowledge. The base for this visual interface consists of so-called knowledge maps, which enable the exploration of existing knowledge and the discovery of new knowledge. Our open source knowledge mapping software applies a mixture of summarization techniques and similarity measures on article metadata, which are iteratively chained together. After processing, the representation is saved in a database for use in a web visualization. In the future, we want to create a space for collective knowledge mapping that brings together individuals and communities involved in exploration and discovery. We want to enable people to guide each other in their discovery by collaboratively annotating and modifying the automatically created maps.

Source

027.7 Zeitschrift für Bibliothekskultur. 4(2016), H.2

Type

a

0.009392545 = product of:
  0.01878509 = sum of:
    0.01878509 = product of:
      0.028177634 = sum of:
        0.012574802 = weight(_text_:a in 2155) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.012574802 = score(doc=2155,freq=28.0), product of:
            0.052761257 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.045758117 = queryNorm
            0.23833402 = fieldWeight in 2155, product of:
              5.2915025 = tf(freq=28.0), with freq of:
                28.0 = termFreq=28.0
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2155)
        0.015602832 = weight(_text_:h in 2155) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.015602832 = score(doc=2155,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.113683715 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.4844491 = idf(docFreq=10020, maxDocs=44218)
              0.045758117 = queryNorm
            0.13724773 = fieldWeight in 2155, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              2.4844491 = idf(docFreq=10020, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2155)
      0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

The recent interest in Big Data has generated a broad range of new academic, corporate, and policy practices along with an evolving debate among its proponents, detractors, and skeptics. While the practices draw on a common set of tools, techniques, and technologies, most contributions to the debate come either from a particular disciplinary perspective or with a focus on a domain-specific issue. A close examination of these contributions reveals a set of common problematics that arise in various guises and in different places. It also demonstrates the need for a critical synthesis of the conceptual and practical dilemmas surrounding Big Data. The purpose of this article is to provide such a synthesis by drawing on relevant writings in the sciences, humanities, policy, and trade literature. In bringing these diverse literatures together, we aim to shed light on the common underlying issues that concern and affect all of these areas. By contextualizing the phenomenon of Big Data within larger socioeconomic developments, we also seek to provide a broader understanding of its drivers, barriers, and challenges. This approach allows us to identify attributes of Big Data that require more attention-autonomy, opacity, generativity, disparity, and futurity-leading to questions and ideas for moving beyond dilemmas.

Type

a

0.009162326 = product of:
  0.018324653 = sum of:
    0.018324653 = product of:
      0.027486978 = sum of:
        0.0026886058 = weight(_text_:a in 5234) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.0026886058 = score(doc=5234,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.052761257 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.045758117 = queryNorm
            0.050957955 = fieldWeight in 5234, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=5234)
        0.024798373 = weight(_text_:22 in 5234) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.024798373 = score(doc=5234,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.16023713 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.045758117 = queryNorm
            0.15476047 = fieldWeight in 5234, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=5234)
      0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Date

22. 1.2018 11:33:49

Type

a

0.008929739 = product of:
  0.017859478 = sum of:
    0.017859478 = product of:
      0.026789214 = sum of:
        0.008065818 = weight(_text_:a in 3015) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.008065818 = score(doc=3015,freq=8.0), product of:
            0.052761257 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.045758117 = queryNorm
            0.15287387 = fieldWeight in 3015, product of:
              2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
                8.0 = termFreq=8.0
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=3015)
        0.018723397 = weight(_text_:h in 3015) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.018723397 = score(doc=3015,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.113683715 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.4844491 = idf(docFreq=10020, maxDocs=44218)
              0.045758117 = queryNorm
            0.16469726 = fieldWeight in 3015, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              2.4844491 = idf(docFreq=10020, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=3015)
      0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

We analyze the linguistic evolution of selected scientific disciplines over a 30-year time span (1970s to 2000s). Our focus is on four highly specialized disciplines at the boundaries of computer science that emerged during that time: computational linguistics, bioinformatics, digital construction, and microelectronics. Our analysis is driven by the question whether these disciplines develop a distinctive language use-both individually and collectively-over the given time period. The data set is the English Scientific Text Corpus (scitex), which includes texts from the 1970s/1980s and early 2000s. Our theoretical basis is register theory. In terms of methods, we combine corpus-based methods of feature extraction (various aggregated features [part-of-speech based], n-grams, lexico-grammatical patterns) and automatic text classification. The results of our research are directly relevant to the study of linguistic variation and languages for specific purposes (LSP) and have implications for various natural language processing (NLP) tasks, for example, authorship attribution, text mining, or training NLP tools.

Type

a

0.008569533 = product of:
  0.017139066 = sum of:
    0.017139066 = product of:
      0.025708599 = sum of:
        0.006985203 = weight(_text_:a in 521) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.006985203 = score(doc=521,freq=6.0), product of:
            0.052761257 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.045758117 = queryNorm
            0.13239266 = fieldWeight in 521, product of:
              2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
                6.0 = termFreq=6.0
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=521)
        0.018723397 = weight(_text_:h in 521) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.018723397 = score(doc=521,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.113683715 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.4844491 = idf(docFreq=10020, maxDocs=44218)
              0.045758117 = queryNorm
            0.16469726 = fieldWeight in 521, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              2.4844491 = idf(docFreq=10020, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=521)
      0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

Applying text mining techniques to legal issues has been an emerging research topic in recent years. Although some previous studies focused on assisting professionals in the retrieval of related legal documents, they did not take into account the general public and their difficulty in describing legal problems in professional legal terms. Because this problem has not been addressed by previous research, this study aims to design a text-mining-based method that allows the general public to use everyday vocabulary to search for and retrieve criminal judgments. The experimental results indicate that our method can help the general public, who are not familiar with professional legal terms, to acquire relevant criminal judgments more accurately and effectively.

Type

a

0.008142265 = product of:
  0.01628453 = sum of:
    0.01628453 = product of:
      0.024426792 = sum of:
        0.0057033943 = weight(_text_:a in 605) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.0057033943 = score(doc=605,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.052761257 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.045758117 = queryNorm
            0.10809815 = fieldWeight in 605, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=605)
        0.018723397 = weight(_text_:h in 605) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.018723397 = score(doc=605,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.113683715 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.4844491 = idf(docFreq=10020, maxDocs=44218)
              0.045758117 = queryNorm
            0.16469726 = fieldWeight in 605, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              2.4844491 = idf(docFreq=10020, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=605)
      0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

With the development of Web2.0, social tagging systems in which users can freely choose tags to annotate resources according to their interests have attracted much attention. In particular, literature on the emergence of collective intelligence in social tagging systems has increased. In this article, we propose a probabilistic generative model to detect latent topical communities among users. Social tags and resource contents are leveraged to model user interest in two similar and correlated ways. Our primary goal is to capture user tagging behavior and interest and discover the emergent topical community structure. The communities should be groups of users with frequent social interactions as well as similar topical interests, which would have important research implications for personalized information services. Experimental results on two real social tagging data sets with different genres have shown that the proposed generative model more accurately models user interest and detects high-quality and meaningful topical communities.

Type

a

0.007585435 = product of:
  0.01517087 = sum of:
    0.01517087 = product of:
      0.022756305 = sum of:
        0.004032909 = weight(_text_:a in 3952) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.004032909 = score(doc=3952,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.052761257 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.045758117 = queryNorm
            0.07643694 = fieldWeight in 3952, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=3952)
        0.018723397 = weight(_text_:h in 3952) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.018723397 = score(doc=3952,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.113683715 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.4844491 = idf(docFreq=10020, maxDocs=44218)
              0.045758117 = queryNorm
            0.16469726 = fieldWeight in 3952, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              2.4844491 = idf(docFreq=10020, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=3952)
      0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Source

Perspektive Bibliothek. 5(2016) H.1, S.49-73

Type

a

0.007441449 = product of:
  0.014882898 = sum of:
    0.014882898 = product of:
      0.022324346 = sum of:
        0.0067215143 = weight(_text_:a in 4367) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.0067215143 = score(doc=4367,freq=8.0), product of:
            0.052761257 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.045758117 = queryNorm
            0.12739488 = fieldWeight in 4367, product of:
              2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
                8.0 = termFreq=8.0
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4367)
        0.015602832 = weight(_text_:h in 4367) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.015602832 = score(doc=4367,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.113683715 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.4844491 = idf(docFreq=10020, maxDocs=44218)
              0.045758117 = queryNorm
            0.13724773 = fieldWeight in 4367, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              2.4844491 = idf(docFreq=10020, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4367)
      0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

Information extraction is an important text-mining task that aims at extracting prespecified types of information from large text collections and making them available in structured representations such as databases. In the biomedical domain, information extraction can be applied to help biologists make the most use of their digital-literature archives. Currently, there are large amounts of biomedical literature that contain rich information about biomedical substances. Extracting such knowledge requires a good named entity recognition technique. In this article, we combine conditional random fields (CRFs), a state-of-the-art sequence-labeling algorithm, with two semisupervised learning techniques, bootstrapping and feature sampling, to recognize disease names from biomedical literature. Two data-processing strategies for each technique also were analyzed: one sequentially processing unlabeled data partitions and another one processing unlabeled data partitions in a round-robin fashion. The experimental results showed the advantage of semisupervised learning techniques given limited labeled training data. Specifically, CRFs with bootstrapping implemented in sequential fashion outperformed strictly supervised CRFs for disease name recognition. The project was supported by NIH/NLM Grant R33 LM07299-01, 2002-2005.

Type

a

0.007441449 = product of:
  0.014882898 = sum of:
    0.014882898 = product of:
      0.022324346 = sum of:
        0.0067215143 = weight(_text_:a in 1225) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.0067215143 = score(doc=1225,freq=8.0), product of:
            0.052761257 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.045758117 = queryNorm
            0.12739488 = fieldWeight in 1225, product of:
              2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
                8.0 = termFreq=8.0
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1225)
        0.015602832 = weight(_text_:h in 1225) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.015602832 = score(doc=1225,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.113683715 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.4844491 = idf(docFreq=10020, maxDocs=44218)
              0.045758117 = queryNorm
            0.13724773 = fieldWeight in 1225, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              2.4844491 = idf(docFreq=10020, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1225)
      0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

An organization performing environmental scanning generally monitors or tracks various events concerning its external environment. One of the major resources for environmental scanning is online news documents, which are readily accessible on news websites or infomediaries. However, the proliferation of the World Wide Web, which increases information sources and improves information circulation, has vastly expanded the amount of information to be scanned. Thus, it is essential to develop an effective event episode discovery mechanism to organize news documents pertaining to an event of interest. In this study, we propose two new metrics, Term Frequency × Inverse Document FrequencyTempo (TF×IDFTempo) and TF×Enhanced-IDFTempo, and develop a temporal-based event episode discovery (TEED) technique that uses the proposed metrics for feature selection and document representation. Using a traditional TF×IDF-based hierarchical agglomerative clustering technique as a performance benchmark, our empirical evaluation reveals that the proposed TEED technique outperforms its benchmark, as measured by cluster recall and cluster precision. In addition, the use of TF×Enhanced-IDFTempo significantly improves the effectiveness of event episode discovery when compared with the use of TF×IDFTempo.

Type

a

0.007441449 = product of:
  0.014882898 = sum of:
    0.014882898 = product of:
      0.022324346 = sum of:
        0.0067215143 = weight(_text_:a in 1286) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.0067215143 = score(doc=1286,freq=8.0), product of:
            0.052761257 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.045758117 = queryNorm
            0.12739488 = fieldWeight in 1286, product of:
              2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
                8.0 = termFreq=8.0
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1286)
        0.015602832 = weight(_text_:h in 1286) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.015602832 = score(doc=1286,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.113683715 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.4844491 = idf(docFreq=10020, maxDocs=44218)
              0.045758117 = queryNorm
            0.13724773 = fieldWeight in 1286, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              2.4844491 = idf(docFreq=10020, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1286)
      0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

With the rapid growth of Web 2.0, community question answering (CQA) has become a prevalent information seeking channel, in which users form interactive communities by posting questions and providing answers. Communities may evolve over time, because of changes in users' interests, activities, and new users joining the network. To better understand user interactions in CQA communities, it is necessary to analyze the community structures and track community evolution over time. Existing work in CQA focuses on question searching or content quality detection, and the important problems of community extraction and evolutionary pattern detection have not been studied. In this article, we propose a probabilistic community model (PCM) to extract overlapping community structures and capture their evolution patterns in CQA. The empirical results show that our algorithm appears to improve the community extraction quality. We show empirically, using the iPhone data set, that interesting community evolution patterns can be discovered, with each evolution pattern reflecting the variation of users' interests over time. Our analysis suggests that individual users could benefit to gain comprehensive information from tracking the transition of products. We also show that the communities provide a decision-making basis for business.

Type

a

0.007441449 = product of:
  0.014882898 = sum of:
    0.014882898 = product of:
      0.022324346 = sum of:
        0.0067215143 = weight(_text_:a in 3607) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.0067215143 = score(doc=3607,freq=8.0), product of:
            0.052761257 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.045758117 = queryNorm
            0.12739488 = fieldWeight in 3607, product of:
              2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
                8.0 = termFreq=8.0
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3607)
        0.015602832 = weight(_text_:h in 3607) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.015602832 = score(doc=3607,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.113683715 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.4844491 = idf(docFreq=10020, maxDocs=44218)
              0.045758117 = queryNorm
            0.13724773 = fieldWeight in 3607, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              2.4844491 = idf(docFreq=10020, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3607)
      0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

The abundance of medical resources has encouraged the development of systems that allow for efficient searches of information in large medical image data sets. State-of-the-art image retrieval models are classified into three categories: content-based (visual) models, textual models, and combined models. Content-based models use visual features to answer image queries, textual image retrieval models use word matching to answer textual queries, and combined image retrieval models, use both textual and visual features to answer queries. Nevertheless, most of previous works in this field have used the same image retrieval model independently of the query type. In this article, we define a list of generic and specific medical query features and exploit them in an association rule mining technique to discover correlations between query features and image retrieval models. Based on these rules, we propose to use an associative classifier (NaiveClass) to find the best suitable retrieval model given a new textual query. We also propose a second associative classifier (SmartClass) to select the most appropriate default class for the query. Experiments are performed on Medical ImageCLEF queries from 2008 to 2012 to evaluate the impact of the proposed query features on the classification performance. The results show that combining our proposed specific and generic query features is effective in query classification.

Type

a

0.0021255296 = product of:
  0.004251059 = sum of:
    0.004251059 = product of:
      0.012753177 = sum of:
        0.012753177 = weight(_text_:a in 4286) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.012753177 = score(doc=4286,freq=20.0), product of:
            0.052761257 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.045758117 = queryNorm
            0.24171482 = fieldWeight in 4286, product of:
              4.472136 = tf(freq=20.0), with freq of:
                20.0 = termFreq=20.0
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4286)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

Geolocated social media data provide a powerful source of information about places and regional human behavior. Because only a small amount of social media data have been geolocation-annotated, inference techniques play a substantial role to increase the volume of annotated data. Conventional research in this area has been based on the text content of posts from a given user or the social network of the user, with some recent crossovers between the text- and network-based approaches. This paper proposes a novel approach to categorize highly-mentioned users (celebrities) into Local and Global types, and consequently use Local celebrities as location indicators. A label propagation algorithm is then used over the refined social network for geolocation inference. Finally, we propose a hybrid approach by merging a text-based method as a back-off strategy into our network-based approach. Empirical experiments over three standard Twitter benchmark data sets demonstrate that our approach outperforms state-of-the-art user geolocation methods.

Type

a

0.0020164545 = product of:
  0.004032909 = sum of:
    0.004032909 = product of:
      0.012098727 = sum of:
        0.012098727 = weight(_text_:a in 4226) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.012098727 = score(doc=4226,freq=18.0), product of:
            0.052761257 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.045758117 = queryNorm
            0.22931081 = fieldWeight in 4226, product of:
              4.2426405 = tf(freq=18.0), with freq of:
                18.0 = termFreq=18.0
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4226)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

Many powerful methods and tools exist for extracting meaning from scientific publications, their texts, and their citation links. However, existing proposals often neglect a fundamental aspect of learning: that understanding and learning require an active and constructive exploration of a domain. In this paper, we describe a new method and a tool that use data mining and interactivity to turn the typical search and retrieve dialogue, in which the user asks questions and a system gives answers, into a dialogue that also involves sense-making, in which the user has to become active by constructing a bibliography and a domain model of the search term(s). This model starts from an automatically generated and annotated clustering solution that is iteratively modified by users. The tool is part of an integrated authoring system covering all phases from search through reading and sense-making to writing. Two evaluation studies demonstrate the usability of this interactive and constructive approach, and they show that clusters and groups represent identifiable sub-topics.

Type

a

0.0019208328 = product of:
  0.0038416656 = sum of:
    0.0038416656 = product of:
      0.011524997 = sum of:
        0.011524997 = weight(_text_:a in 2338) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.011524997 = score(doc=2338,freq=12.0), product of:
            0.052761257 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.045758117 = queryNorm
            0.21843673 = fieldWeight in 2338, product of:
              3.4641016 = tf(freq=12.0), with freq of:
                12.0 = termFreq=12.0
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=2338)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

Hundreds of thousands of hashtags are generated every day on Twitter. Only a few will burst and become trending topics. In this article, we provide the definition of a bursting hashtag and conduct a systematic study of a series of challenging prediction problems that span the entire life cycles of bursting hashtags. Around the problem of "how to build a system to predict bursting hashtags," we explore different types of features and present machine learning solutions. On real data sets from Twitter, experiments are conducted to evaluate the effectiveness of the proposed solutions and the contributions of features.

Type

a