Search (52 results, page 1 of 3)

  • × theme_ss:"Folksonomies"
  1. Peters, I.; Stock, W.G.: Folksonomies in Wissensrepräsentation und Information Retrieval (2008) 0.02 
    0.022594055 = product of:
  0.04518811 = sum of:
    0.014856329 = weight(_text_:h in 1597) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.014856329 = score(doc=1597,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.09020387 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.4844491 = idf(docFreq=10020, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03630739 = queryNorm
        0.16469726 = fieldWeight in 1597, 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=1597)
    0.025806347 = weight(_text_:u in 1597) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.025806347 = score(doc=1597,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.11888653 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.2744443 = idf(docFreq=4547, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03630739 = queryNorm
        0.21706703 = fieldWeight in 1597, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.2744443 = idf(docFreq=4547, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1597)
    0.0045254347 = weight(_text_:a in 1597) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0045254347 = score(doc=1597,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.041864127 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03630739 = queryNorm
        0.10809815 = fieldWeight in 1597, 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=1597)
  0.5 = coord(3/6)
    Abstract
    Die populären Web 2.0-Dienste werden von Prosumern - Produzenten und gleichsam Konsumenten - nicht nur dazu genutzt, Inhalte zu produzieren, sondern auch, um sie inhaltlich zu erschließen. Folksonomies erlauben es dem Nutzer, Dokumente mit eigenen Schlagworten, sog. Tags, zu beschreiben, ohne dabei auf gewisse Regeln oder Vorgaben achten zu müssen. Neben einigen Vorteilen zeigen Folksonomies aber auch zahlreiche Schwächen (u. a. einen Mangel an Präzision). Um diesen Nachteilen größtenteils entgegenzuwirken, schlagen wir eine Interpretation der Tags als natürlichsprachige Wörter vor. Dadurch ist es uns möglich, Methoden des Natural Language Processing (NLP) auf die Tags anzuwenden und so linguistische Probleme der Tags zu beseitigen. Darüber hinaus diskutieren wir Ansätze und weitere Vorschläge (Tagverteilungen, Kollaboration und akteurspezifische Aspekte) hinsichtlich eines Relevance Rankings von getaggten Dokumenten. Neben Vorschlägen auf ähnliche Dokumente ("more like this!") erlauben Folksonomies auch Hinweise auf verwandte Nutzer und damit auf Communities ("more like me!").
    Source
    Information - Wissenschaft und Praxis. 59(2008) H.2, S.77-90
    Type
    a
  2. Peters, I.: Benutzerzentrierte Erschließungsverfahren (2013) 0.02 
    0.016114619 = product of:
  0.048343856 = sum of:
    0.04301058 = weight(_text_:u in 718) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.04301058 = score(doc=718,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.11888653 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.2744443 = idf(docFreq=4547, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03630739 = queryNorm
        0.3617784 = fieldWeight in 718, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.2744443 = idf(docFreq=4547, maxDocs=44218)
          0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=718)
    0.0053332755 = weight(_text_:a in 718) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0053332755 = score(doc=718,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.041864127 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03630739 = queryNorm
        0.12739488 = fieldWeight in 718, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=718)
  0.33333334 = coord(2/6)
    Source
    Grundlagen der praktischen Information und Dokumentation. Handbuch zur Einführung in die Informationswissenschaft und -praxis. 6., völlig neu gefaßte Ausgabe. Hrsg. von R. Kuhlen, W. Semar u. D. Strauch. Begründet von Klaus Laisiepen, Ernst Lutterbeck, Karl-Heinrich Meyer-Uhlenried
    Type
    a
  3. Watters, C.; Nizam, N.: Knowledge organization on the Web : the emergent role of social classification (2012) 0.01 
    0.013084023 = product of:
  0.03925207 = sum of:
    0.030107405 = weight(_text_:u in 828) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.030107405 = score(doc=828,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.11888653 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.2744443 = idf(docFreq=4547, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03630739 = queryNorm
        0.25324488 = fieldWeight in 828, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.2744443 = idf(docFreq=4547, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=828)
    0.009144663 = weight(_text_:a in 828) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.009144663 = score(doc=828,freq=12.0), product of:
        0.041864127 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03630739 = queryNorm
        0.21843673 = fieldWeight in 828, 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=828)
  0.33333334 = coord(2/6)
    Abstract
    There are close to a billion websites on the Internet with approximately 400 million users worldwide [www.internetworldstats.com]. People go to websites for a wide variety of different information tasks, from finding a restaurant to serious research. Many of the difficulties with searching the Web, as it is structured currently, can be attributed to increases to scale. The content of the Web is now so large that we only have a rough estimate of the number of sites and the range of information is extremely diverse, from blogs and photos to research articles and news videos.
    Source
    Categories, contexts and relations in knowledge organization: Proceedings of the Twelfth International ISKO Conference 6-9 August 2012, Mysore, India. Eds.: Neelameghan, A. u. K.S. Raghavan
    Type
    a
  4. Spiteri, L.: ¬The structure and form of folksonomy tags : the road to the public library catalogue (2007) 0.01 
    0.012891694 = product of:
  0.03867508 = sum of:
    0.03440846 = weight(_text_:u in 1141) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.03440846 = score(doc=1141,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.11888653 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.2744443 = idf(docFreq=4547, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03630739 = queryNorm
        0.28942272 = fieldWeight in 1141, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.2744443 = idf(docFreq=4547, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=1141)
    0.0042666206 = weight(_text_:a in 1141) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0042666206 = score(doc=1141,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.041864127 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03630739 = queryNorm
        0.10191591 = fieldWeight in 1141, 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=1141)
  0.33333334 = coord(2/6)
    Source
    ¬La interdisciplinariedad y la transdisciplinariedad en la organización del conocimiento científico : actas del VIII Congreso ISKO-España, León, 18, 19 y 20 de Abril de 2007 : Interdisciplinarity and transdisciplinarity in the organization of scientific knowledge. Ed.: B. Rodriguez Bravo u. M.L Alvite Diez
    Type
    a
  5. Peters, I.: Folksonomies, social tagging and information retrieval (2011) 0.01 
    0.0112148775 = product of:
  0.03364463 = sum of:
    0.025806347 = weight(_text_:u in 4907) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.025806347 = score(doc=4907,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.11888653 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.2744443 = idf(docFreq=4547, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03630739 = queryNorm
        0.21706703 = fieldWeight in 4907, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.2744443 = idf(docFreq=4547, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4907)
    0.007838283 = weight(_text_:a in 4907) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.007838283 = score(doc=4907,freq=12.0), product of:
        0.041864127 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03630739 = queryNorm
        0.18723148 = fieldWeight in 4907, product of:
          3.4641016 = tf(freq=12.0), with freq of:
            12.0 = termFreq=12.0
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4907)
  0.33333334 = coord(2/6)
    Abstract
    Services in Web 2.0 generate a large quantity of information, distributed over a range of resources (e.g. photos, URLs, videos) and integrated into different platforms (e.g. social bookmarking systems, sharing platforms (Peters, 2009). To adequately use this mass of information and to extract it from the platforms, users must be equipped with suitable tools and knowledge. After all, the best information is useless if users cannot find it: 'The model of information consumption relies on the information being found' (Vander Wal, 2004). In Web 2.0, the retrieval component has been established through so-called folksonomies (Vander Wal, 2005a), which are considered as several combinations of an information resource, one or more freely chosen keywords ('tags') and a user. Web 2.0 services that use folksonomies as an indexing and retrieval tool are defined as 'collaborative information services' because they allow for the collaborative creation of a public database that is accessible to all users (registered, where necessary) via the tags of the folksonomy (Ding et al., 2009; Heymann, Paepcke and Garcia-Molina, 2010).
    Source
    Innovations in information retrieval: perspectives for theory and practice. Eds.: A. Foster, u. P. Rafferty
    Type
    a
  6. Kim, H.H.: Toward video semantic search based on a structured folksonomy (2011) 0.01 
    0.00894619 = product of:
  0.026838567 = sum of:
    0.02150529 = weight(_text_:u in 4350) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.02150529 = score(doc=4350,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.11888653 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.2744443 = idf(docFreq=4547, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03630739 = queryNorm
        0.1808892 = fieldWeight in 4350, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.2744443 = idf(docFreq=4547, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4350)
    0.0053332755 = weight(_text_:a in 4350) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0053332755 = score(doc=4350,freq=8.0), product of:
        0.041864127 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03630739 = queryNorm
        0.12739488 = fieldWeight in 4350, 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=4350)
  0.33333334 = coord(2/6)
    Abstract
    This study investigated the effectiveness of query expansion using synonymous and co-occurrence tags in users' video searches as well as the effect of visual storyboard surrogates on users' relevance judgments when browsing videos. To do so, we designed a structured folksonomy-based system in which tag queries can be expanded via synonyms or co-occurrence words, based on the use of WordNet 2.1 synonyms and Flickr's related tags. To evaluate the structured folksonomy-based system, we conducted an experiment, the results of which suggest that the mean recall rate in the structured folksonomy-based system is statistically higher than that in a tag-based system without query expansion; however, the mean precision rate in the structured folksonomy-based system is not statistically higher than that in the tag-based system. Next, we compared the precision rates of the proposed system with storyboards (SB), in which SB and text metadata are shown to users when they browse video search results, with those of the proposed system without SB, in which only text metadata are shown. Our result showed that browsing only text surrogates-including tags without multimedia surrogates-is not sufficient for users' relevance judgments.
    Theme
    Semantisches Umfeld in Indexierung u. Retrieval
    Type
    a
  7. Park, H.: ¬A conceptual framework to study folksonomic interaction (2011) 0.01 
    0.008001294 = product of:
  0.024003882 = sum of:
    0.012380276 = weight(_text_:h in 4852) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.012380276 = score(doc=4852,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.09020387 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.4844491 = idf(docFreq=10020, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03630739 = queryNorm
        0.13724773 = fieldWeight in 4852, 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=4852)
    0.011623605 = weight(_text_:a in 4852) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.011623605 = score(doc=4852,freq=38.0), product of:
        0.041864127 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03630739 = queryNorm
        0.2776507 = fieldWeight in 4852, product of:
          6.164414 = tf(freq=38.0), with freq of:
            38.0 = termFreq=38.0
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4852)
  0.33333334 = coord(2/6)
    Abstract
    This paper proposes a conceptual framework to recast a folksonomy as a Web classification and to use this to explore the ways in which people work with it in assessing, sharing, and navigating Web resources. The author uses information scent and foraging theory as a context to discuss how folksonomy is constructed through interactions among users, a folksonomic system, and a given domain that consists of a group of users who share the same interest or goals. The discussion centers on two dimensions of folksonomies: (1) folksonomy as a Web classification which puts like information together in a Web context; and (2) folksonomy as information scent which helps users to find related resources and users, and obtain desired information. This paper aims to integrate these two dimensions with a conceptual framework that addresses the structure of a folksonomy shaped by users' interactions. A proposed framework consists of three components of users' interactions with a folksonomy: (a) tagging - cognitive categorization of Web accessible resources by an individual user; (b) navigation - exploration and discovery of Web accessible resources in the folksonomic system; and (c) knowledge sharing - representation and communication of knowledge within a domain. This understanding will help us motivate possible future directions of research in folksonomy. This initial framework will frame a number of research questions and help lay the groundwork for future empirical research which focuses on qualitative analysis of a folksonomy and users' tagging behaviors.
    Type
    a
  8. Peters, I.: Folksonomies : nutzergenerierte Schlagwörter als Indexierungswerkzeug für die Massen (2011) 0.01 
    0.007021893 = product of:
  0.021065678 = sum of:
    0.017332384 = weight(_text_:h in 4909) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.017332384 = score(doc=4909,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.09020387 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.4844491 = idf(docFreq=10020, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03630739 = queryNorm
        0.19214681 = fieldWeight in 4909, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          2.4844491 = idf(docFreq=10020, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=4909)
    0.0037332932 = weight(_text_:a in 4909) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0037332932 = score(doc=4909,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.041864127 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03630739 = queryNorm
        0.089176424 = fieldWeight in 4909, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=4909)
  0.33333334 = coord(2/6)
    Source
    Mitteilungen der Vereinigung Österreichischer Bibliothekarinnen und Bibliothekare. 64(2011) H.3/4, S.444-459
    Type
    a
  9. Peters, I.; Schumann, L.; Terliesner, J.: Folksonomy-basiertes Information Retrieval unter der Lupe (2012) 0.01 
    0.007021893 = product of:
  0.021065678 = sum of:
    0.017332384 = weight(_text_:h in 406) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.017332384 = score(doc=406,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.09020387 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.4844491 = idf(docFreq=10020, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03630739 = queryNorm
        0.19214681 = fieldWeight in 406, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          2.4844491 = idf(docFreq=10020, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=406)
    0.0037332932 = weight(_text_:a in 406) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0037332932 = score(doc=406,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.041864127 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03630739 = queryNorm
        0.089176424 = fieldWeight in 406, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=406)
  0.33333334 = coord(2/6)
    Source
    Information - Wissenschaft und Praxis. 63(2012) H.4, S.273-280
    Type
    a
  10. Catarino, M.E.; Baptista, A.A.: Relating folksonomies with Dublin Core (2008) 0.01 
    0.005852444 = product of:
  0.017557332 = sum of:
    0.005962784 = weight(_text_:a in 2652) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.005962784 = score(doc=2652,freq=10.0), product of:
        0.041864127 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03630739 = queryNorm
        0.14243183 = fieldWeight in 2652, 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=2652)
    0.011594548 = product of:
      0.034783643 = sum of:
        0.034783643 = weight(_text_:22 in 2652) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.034783643 = score(doc=2652,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.1271423 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03630739 = queryNorm
            0.27358043 = fieldWeight in 2652, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2652)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.33333334 = coord(2/6)
    Abstract
    Folksonomy is the result of describing Web resources with tags created by Web users. Although it has become a popular application for the description of resources, in general terms Folksonomies are not being conveniently integrated in metadata. However, if the appropriate metadata elements are identified, then further work may be conducted to automatically assign tags to these elements (RDF properties) and use them in Semantic Web applications. This article presents research carried out to continue the project Kinds of Tags, which intends to identify elements required for metadata originating from folksonomies and to propose an application profile for DC Social Tagging. The work provides information that may be used by software applications to assign tags to metadata elements and, therefore, means for tags to be conveniently gathered by metadata interoperability tools. Despite the unquestionably high value of DC and the significance of the already existing properties in DC Terms, the pilot study show revealed a significant number of tags for which no corresponding properties yet existed. A need for new properties, such as Action, Depth, Rate, and Utility was determined. Those potential new properties will have to be validated in a later stage by the DC Social Tagging Community.
    Pages
    S.14-22
    Source
    Metadata for semantic and social applications : proceedings of the International Conference on Dublin Core and Metadata Applications, Berlin, 22 - 26 September 2008, DC 2008: Berlin, Germany / ed. by Jane Greenberg and Wolfgang Klas
    Type
    a
  11. Peters, I.: Folksonomies und kollaborative Informationsdienste : eine Alternative zur Websuche? (2011) 0.01 
    0.0058344766 = product of:
  0.01750343 = sum of:
    0.0042666206 = weight(_text_:a in 343) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0042666206 = score(doc=343,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.041864127 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03630739 = queryNorm
        0.10191591 = fieldWeight in 343, 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=343)
    0.013236808 = product of:
      0.03971042 = sum of:
        0.03971042 = weight(_text_:29 in 343) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.03971042 = score(doc=343,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.12771805 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03630739 = queryNorm
            0.31092256 = fieldWeight in 343, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=343)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.33333334 = coord(2/6)
    Pages
    S.29-53
    Type
    a
  12. Wesch, M.: Information R/evolution (2006) 0.01 
    0.0050704367 = product of:
  0.01521131 = sum of:
    0.0037332932 = weight(_text_:a in 1267) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0037332932 = score(doc=1267,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.041864127 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03630739 = queryNorm
        0.089176424 = fieldWeight in 1267, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=1267)
    0.011478017 = product of:
      0.03443405 = sum of:
        0.03443405 = weight(_text_:22 in 1267) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.03443405 = score(doc=1267,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.1271423 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03630739 = queryNorm
            0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 1267, 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=1267)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.33333334 = coord(2/6)
    Abstract
    This video explores the changes in the way we find, store, create, critique, and share information. This video was created as a conversation starter, and works especially well when brainstorming with people about the near future and the skills needed in order to harness, evaluate, and create information effectively. Ein sehr schöner Kurzfilm von Michael Wesch, dem wir auch den Beitrag zu Web 2.0 (The Machine is Us/ing Us) verdanken (vor einiger Zeit hier besprochen), thematisiert die Veränderung der Handhabung von Information (insbesondere die Strukturierung und Ordnung, aber auch die Generierung und Speicherung), die auf ihre digitale Gestalt zurückzuführen ist. Kernaussage: Da die Informationen keine physikalischen Beschränkungen mehr unterworfen sind, wird die Ordnung der Informationen vielfältiger, flexibler und für jedermann einfacher zugänglich.
    Date
    5. 1.2008 19:22:48
  13. Morrison, P.J.: Tagging and searching : search retrieval effectiveness of folksonomies on the World Wide Web (2008) 0.00 
    0.0047879117 = product of:
  0.014363734 = sum of:
    0.0045254347 = weight(_text_:a in 2109) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0045254347 = score(doc=2109,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.041864127 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03630739 = queryNorm
        0.10809815 = fieldWeight in 2109, 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=2109)
    0.0098383 = product of:
      0.0295149 = sum of:
        0.0295149 = weight(_text_:22 in 2109) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.0295149 = score(doc=2109,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.1271423 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03630739 = queryNorm
            0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 2109, 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=2109)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.33333334 = coord(2/6)
    Abstract
    Many Web sites have begun allowing users to submit items to a collection and tag them with keywords. The folksonomies built from these tags are an interesting topic that has seen little empirical research. This study compared the search information retrieval (IR) performance of folksonomies from social bookmarking Web sites against search engines and subject directories. Thirty-four participants created 103 queries for various information needs. Results from each IR system were collected and participants judged relevance. Folksonomy search results overlapped with those from the other systems, and documents found by both search engines and folksonomies were significantly more likely to be judged relevant than those returned by any single IR system type. The search engines in the study had the highest precision and recall, but the folksonomies fared surprisingly well. Del.icio.us was statistically indistinguishable from the directories in many cases. Overall the directories were more precise than the folksonomies but they had similar recall scores. Better query handling may enhance folksonomy IR performance further. The folksonomies studied were promising, and may be able to improve Web search performance.
    Date
    1. 8.2008 12:39:22
    Type
    a
  14. Xie, H.; Li, X.; Wang, T.; Lau, R.Y.K.; Wong, T.-L.; Chen, L.; Wang, F.L.; Li, Q.: Incorporating sentiment into tag-based user profiles and resource profiles for personalized search in folksonomy (2016) 0.00 
    0.0047236136 = product of:
  0.01417084 = sum of:
    0.00990422 = weight(_text_:h in 2671) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.00990422 = score(doc=2671,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.09020387 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.4844491 = idf(docFreq=10020, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03630739 = queryNorm
        0.10979818 = fieldWeight in 2671, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          2.4844491 = idf(docFreq=10020, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=2671)
    0.0042666206 = weight(_text_:a in 2671) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0042666206 = score(doc=2671,freq=8.0), product of:
        0.041864127 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03630739 = queryNorm
        0.10191591 = fieldWeight in 2671, product of:
          2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
            8.0 = termFreq=8.0
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=2671)
  0.33333334 = coord(2/6)
    Abstract
    In recent years, there has been a rapid growth of user-generated data in collaborative tagging (a.k.a. folksonomy-based) systems due to the prevailing of Web 2.0 communities. To effectively assist users to find their desired resources, it is critical to understand user behaviors and preferences. Tag-based profile techniques, which model users and resources by a vector of relevant tags, are widely employed in folksonomy-based systems. This is mainly because that personalized search and recommendations can be facilitated by measuring relevance between user profiles and resource profiles. However, conventional measurements neglect the sentiment aspect of user-generated tags. In fact, tags can be very emotional and subjective, as users usually express their perceptions and feelings about the resources by tags. Therefore, it is necessary to take sentiment relevance into account into measurements. In this paper, we present a novel generic framework SenticRank to incorporate various sentiment information to various sentiment-based information for personalized search by user profiles and resource profiles. In this framework, content-based sentiment ranking and collaborative sentiment ranking methods are proposed to obtain sentiment-based personalized ranking. To the best of our knowledge, this is the first work of integrating sentiment information to address the problem of the personalized tag-based search in collaborative tagging systems. Moreover, we compare the proposed sentiment-based personalized search with baselines in the experiments, the results of which have verified the effectiveness of the proposed framework. In addition, we study the influences by popular sentiment dictionaries, and SenticNet is the most prominent knowledge base to boost the performance of personalized search in folksonomy.
    Type
    a
  15. Kim, H.L.; Scerri, S.; Breslin, J.G.; Decker, S.; Kim, H.G.: ¬The state of the art in tag ontologies : a semantic model for tagging and folksonomies (2008) 0.00 
    0.004720456 = product of:
  0.014161367 = sum of:
    0.005962784 = weight(_text_:a in 2650) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.005962784 = score(doc=2650,freq=10.0), product of:
        0.041864127 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03630739 = queryNorm
        0.14243183 = fieldWeight in 2650, 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=2650)
    0.0081985835 = product of:
      0.02459575 = sum of:
        0.02459575 = weight(_text_:22 in 2650) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.02459575 = score(doc=2650,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.1271423 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03630739 = queryNorm
            0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 2650, 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=2650)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.33333334 = coord(2/6)
    Abstract
    There is a growing interest into how we represent and share tagging data in collaborative tagging systems. Conventional tags, meaning freely created tags that are not associated with a structured ontology, are not naturally suited for collaborative processes, due to linguistic and grammatical variations, as well as human typing errors. Additionally, tags reflect personal views of the world by individual users, and are not normalised for synonymy, morphology or any other mapping. Our view is that the conventional approach provides very limited semantic value for collaboration. Moreover, in cases where there is some semantic value, automatically sharing semantics via computer manipulations is extremely problematic. This paper explores these problems by discussing approaches for collaborative tagging activities at a semantic level, and presenting conceptual models for collaborative tagging activities and folksonomies. We present criteria for the comparison of existing tag ontologies and discuss their strengths and weaknesses in relation to these criteria.
    Source
    Metadata for semantic and social applications : proceedings of the International Conference on Dublin Core and Metadata Applications, Berlin, 22 - 26 September 2008, DC 2008: Berlin, Germany / ed. by Jane Greenberg and Wolfgang Klas
    Type
    a
  16. Yi, K.; Chan, L.M.: Linking folksonomy to Library of Congress subject headings : an exploratory study (2009) 0.00 
    0.0044548414 = product of:
  0.013364524 = sum of:
    0.00674612 = weight(_text_:a in 3616) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.00674612 = score(doc=3616,freq=20.0), product of:
        0.041864127 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03630739 = queryNorm
        0.16114321 = fieldWeight in 3616, product of:
          4.472136 = tf(freq=20.0), with freq of:
            20.0 = termFreq=20.0
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=3616)
    0.006618404 = product of:
      0.01985521 = sum of:
        0.01985521 = weight(_text_:29 in 3616) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.01985521 = score(doc=3616,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.12771805 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03630739 = queryNorm
            0.15546128 = fieldWeight in 3616, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=3616)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.33333334 = coord(2/6)
    Abstract
    Purpose - The purpose of this paper is to investigate the linking of a folksonomy (user vocabulary) and LCSH (controlled vocabulary) on the basis of word matching, for the potential use of LCSH in bringing order to folksonomies. Design/methodology/approach - A selected sample of a folksonomy from a popular collaborative tagging system, Delicious, was word-matched with LCSH. LCSH was transformed into a tree structure called an LCSH tree for the matching. A close examination was conducted on the characteristics of folksonomies, the overlap of folksonomies with LCSH, and the distribution of folksonomies over the LCSH tree. Findings - The experimental results showed that the total proportion of tags being matched with LC subject headings constituted approximately two-thirds of all tags involved, with an additional 10 percent of the remaining tags having potential matches. A number of barriers for the linking as well as two areas in need of improving the matching are identified and described. Three important tag distribution patterns over the LCSH tree were identified and supported: skewedness, multifacet, and Zipfian-pattern. Research limitations/implications - The results of the study can be adopted for the development of innovative methods of mapping between folksonomy and LCSH, which directly contributes to effective access and retrieval of tagged web resources and to the integration of multiple information repositories based on the two vocabularies. Practical implications - The linking of controlled vocabularies can be applicable to enhance information retrieval capability within collaborative tagging systems as well as across various tagging system information depositories and bibliographic databases. Originality/value - This is among frontier works that examines the potential of linking a folksonomy, extracted from a collaborative tagging system, to an authority-maintained subject heading system. It provides exploratory data to support further advanced mapping methods for linking the two vocabularies.
    Date
    20. 6.2010 14:29:15
    Type
    a
  17. Hayman, S.; Lothian, N.: Taxonomy directed folksonomies : integrating user tagging and controlled vocabularies for Australian education networks (2007) 0.00 
    0.0036283415 = product of:
  0.010885024 = sum of:
    0.0042666206 = weight(_text_:a in 705) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0042666206 = score(doc=705,freq=8.0), product of:
        0.041864127 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03630739 = queryNorm
        0.10191591 = fieldWeight in 705, product of:
          2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
            8.0 = termFreq=8.0
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=705)
    0.006618404 = product of:
      0.01985521 = sum of:
        0.01985521 = weight(_text_:29 in 705) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.01985521 = score(doc=705,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.12771805 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03630739 = queryNorm
            0.15546128 = fieldWeight in 705, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=705)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.33333334 = coord(2/6)
    Abstract
    What is the role of controlled vocabulary in a Web 2.0 world? Can we have the best of both worlds: balancing folksonomies and controlled vocabularies to help communities of users find and share information and resources most relevant to them? education.au develops and manages Australian online services for education and training. Its goal is to bring people, learning and technology together. education.au projects are increasingly involved in exploring the use of Web 2.0 developments building on user ideas, knowledge and experience, and how these might be integrated with existing information management systems. This paper presents work being undertaken in this area, particularly in relation to controlled vocabularies, and discusses the challenges faced. Education Network Australia (edna) is a leading online resource collection and collaborative network for education, with an extensive repository of selected educational resources with metadata created by educators and information specialists. It uses controlled vocabularies for metadata creation and searching, where users receive suggested related terms from an education thesaurus, with their results. We recognise that no formal thesaurus can keep pace with user needs so are interested in exploiting the power of folksonomies. We describe a proof of concept project to develop community contributions to managing information and resources, using Taxonomy-Directed Folksonomy. An established taxonomy from the Australian education sector suggests terms for tagging and users can suggest terms. Importantly, the folksonomy will feed back into the taxonomy showing gaps in coverage and helping us to monitor new terms and usage to improve and develop our formal taxonomies. This model would initially sit alongside the current edna repositories, tools and services but will give us valuable user contributed resources as well as information about how users manage resources. Observing terms suggested, chosen and used in folksonomies is a rich source of information for developing our formal systems so that we can indeed get the best of both worlds.
    Date
    26.12.2011 13:29:46
  18. Broughton, V.: Automatic metadata generation : Digital resource description without human intervention (2007) 0.00 
    0.0032794334 = product of:
  0.0196766 = sum of:
    0.0196766 = product of:
      0.0590298 = sum of:
        0.0590298 = weight(_text_:22 in 6048) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.0590298 = score(doc=6048,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.1271423 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03630739 = queryNorm
            0.46428138 = fieldWeight in 6048, 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=6048)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.16666667 = coord(1/6)
    Date
    22. 9.2007 15:41:14
  19. Fiala, S.: Deutscher Bibliothekartag Leipzig 2007 : Sacherschließung - Informationsdienstleistung nach Mass (2007) 0.00 
    0.0030093826 = product of:
  0.009028148 = sum of:
    0.0074281646 = weight(_text_:h in 415) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0074281646 = score(doc=415,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.09020387 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.4844491 = idf(docFreq=10020, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03630739 = queryNorm
        0.08234863 = fieldWeight in 415, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          2.4844491 = idf(docFreq=10020, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0234375 = fieldNorm(doc=415)
    0.0015999828 = weight(_text_:a in 415) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0015999828 = score(doc=415,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.041864127 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03630739 = queryNorm
        0.03821847 = fieldWeight in 415, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0234375 = fieldNorm(doc=415)
  0.33333334 = coord(2/6)
    Source
    Mitteilungen der Vereinigung Österreichischer Bibliothekarinnen und Bibliothekare. 60(2007) H.2, S.44-46
    Type
    a
  20. Braun, M.: Lesezeichen zum Stöbern : "Social bookmark"-Seiten setzen auf die Empfehlungen ihrer Nutzer (2007) 0.00 
    0.0028973925 = product of:
  0.008692177 = sum of:
    0.0021333103 = weight(_text_:a in 3373) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0021333103 = score(doc=3373,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.041864127 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03630739 = queryNorm
        0.050957955 = fieldWeight in 3373, 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=3373)
    0.006558867 = product of:
      0.019676602 = sum of:
        0.019676602 = weight(_text_:22 in 3373) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.019676602 = score(doc=3373,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.1271423 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03630739 = queryNorm
            0.15476047 = fieldWeight in 3373, 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=3373)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.33333334 = coord(2/6)
    Date
    3. 5.1997 8:44:22
    Type
    a

Authors

Years

Languages

  • e 40
  • d 10
  • el 1
  • More… Less…

Types

  • a 45
  • el 8
  • m 1
  • More… Less…

Themes

Subjects

Classifications