Search (123 results, page 3 of 7)

0.00270615 = product of:
  0.0054123 = sum of:
    0.0054123 = product of:
      0.0108246 = sum of:
        0.0108246 = weight(_text_:a in 4892) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.0108246 = score(doc=4892,freq=8.0), product of:
            0.053105544 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046056706 = queryNorm
            0.20383182 = fieldWeight in 4892, product of:
              2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
                8.0 = termFreq=8.0
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=4892)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

Explores the strengths and limitations of hypertext for the online presentation of thesauri used in information retrieval. Examines the ability of hypertext to support each of 3 common types of thesaurus display: graphic, alphabetical, and hierarchical. Presents a design for a hypertext-based hierarchical display that addresses many inadequacies of printed hierarchical displays. Ullustrates how the design might be implemented using a commercially available hypertext system. Considers issues related to the implementation and evaluation of hypertext-based thesauri

Type

a

0.00270615 = product of:
  0.0054123 = sum of:
    0.0054123 = product of:
      0.0108246 = sum of:
        0.0108246 = weight(_text_:a in 6246) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.0108246 = score(doc=6246,freq=8.0), product of:
            0.053105544 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046056706 = queryNorm
            0.20383182 = fieldWeight in 6246, product of:
              2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
                8.0 = termFreq=8.0
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=6246)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

Describes a consultancy project for the development of a health care thesaurus involving the movement of text between different application programs. The thesaurus was built from existing text within the organisation originating from 3 sources: natural language registry file headings; descriptions from an internal business directory and a controlled vocabulary. The software used was WordPerfect and Cardbox

Type

a

0.00270615 = product of:
  0.0054123 = sum of:
    0.0054123 = product of:
      0.0108246 = sum of:
        0.0108246 = weight(_text_:a in 7537) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.0108246 = score(doc=7537,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.053105544 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046056706 = queryNorm
            0.20383182 = fieldWeight in 7537, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.125 = fieldNorm(doc=7537)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Type

a

0.00270615 = product of:
  0.0054123 = sum of:
    0.0054123 = product of:
      0.0108246 = sum of:
        0.0108246 = weight(_text_:a in 7623) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.0108246 = score(doc=7623,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.053105544 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046056706 = queryNorm
            0.20383182 = fieldWeight in 7623, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.125 = fieldNorm(doc=7623)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Type

a

0.00270615 = product of:
  0.0054123 = sum of:
    0.0054123 = product of:
      0.0108246 = sum of:
        0.0108246 = weight(_text_:a in 6581) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.0108246 = score(doc=6581,freq=8.0), product of:
            0.053105544 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046056706 = queryNorm
            0.20383182 = fieldWeight in 6581, product of:
              2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
                8.0 = termFreq=8.0
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=6581)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

Automatic thesaurus construction is accomplished by extracting term relations mechanically. A popular method uses statistical analysis to discover the term relations. For low frequency terms the statistical information of the terms cannot be reliably used for deciding the relationship of terms. This problem is referred to as the data sparseness problem. Many studies have shown that low frequency terms are of most use in thesaurus construction. Characterizes the statistical behaviour of terms by using an inference network. Develops a formal approach using a Baysian network for the data sparseness problem

Type

a

0.00270615 = product of:
  0.0054123 = sum of:
    0.0054123 = product of:
      0.0108246 = sum of:
        0.0108246 = weight(_text_:a in 2248) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.0108246 = score(doc=2248,freq=8.0), product of:
            0.053105544 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046056706 = queryNorm
            0.20383182 = fieldWeight in 2248, product of:
              2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
                8.0 = termFreq=8.0
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=2248)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

In 1994 the International Union for Health Promotion and Health Education, Regional Office for Europe began a thesaurus project in the field of health promotion and health education, in collaboration with terminologists and health promotion specialists from various European countries. Describes the different phases of the international project. Pays special attention to the origin of the project and the international cooperative imperative needed to bring such a project to fruition

Type

a

0.0026849252 = product of:
  0.0053698504 = sum of:
    0.0053698504 = product of:
      0.010739701 = sum of:
        0.010739701 = weight(_text_:a in 475) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.010739701 = score(doc=475,freq=14.0), product of:
            0.053105544 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046056706 = queryNorm
            0.20223314 = fieldWeight in 475, product of:
              3.7416575 = tf(freq=14.0), with freq of:
                14.0 = termFreq=14.0
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=475)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

General linguistic and specific semantic problems arising in multilingual thesaurus construction are well defined in the various textbooks and in the guidelines covering this area. Many details are provided on the 'conceptual equivalence' issue, and various ways of dealing with conceptual divergence are described. But when discussing semantic solutions, display options, management issues, or use of technology, specialists and guidelines seldom, if ever, go as far as commenting on whether or not a particular option is truly respectful of a language and its speakers. This paper, based on the premise that in a multilingual thesaurus all languages are equal, reviews the options and solutions offered by the guidelines to the developer of specialized thesauri. It also introduces other problems of a sociocultural, and even of a truly political nature, a prominent feature in the daily life of the thesaurus designer with which the theory and the guidelines do not deal very well

Type

a

0.0026473717 = product of:
  0.0052947435 = sum of:
    0.0052947435 = product of:
      0.010589487 = sum of:
        0.010589487 = weight(_text_:a in 7330) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.010589487 = score(doc=7330,freq=10.0), product of:
            0.053105544 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046056706 = queryNorm
            0.19940455 = fieldWeight in 7330, product of:
              3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
                10.0 = termFreq=10.0
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=7330)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

Examines how far automation cluster analysis and association testing are relevant methods for smaller libraries in construction of search thesauri. Using WORDSTAR, a simple form of cluster analysis was tested, with satisfactory results in that the index terms formed clusters of a suitable size. The association test was used to elicit from users' natural language terms which can be used in the search thesaurus as entrance vocabulary. The test showed that users associated very differently in relation to the same stimuli words, with low overlap with terms used in the system's indexing. The results confirmed the need for better feedback. Concludes that while neither method can be used alone, a search thesauri which combine terms from the indexes and from users can be a powerful tool

Type

a

0.0026473717 = product of:
  0.0052947435 = sum of:
    0.0052947435 = product of:
      0.010589487 = sum of:
        0.010589487 = weight(_text_:a in 8201) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.010589487 = score(doc=8201,freq=10.0), product of:
            0.053105544 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046056706 = queryNorm
            0.19940455 = fieldWeight in 8201, product of:
              3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
                10.0 = termFreq=10.0
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=8201)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

Describes the compilation of a subject thesaurus to provide a controlled vocabulary for indexing the New South Wales Government Printing Office's collection of historical photographs. Discusses the use of interactive videodiscs for preserving, presenting and retrieving pictorial collections and describes the software, online access, and data entry. Considers the development of the subject thesaurus and outlines 3 approaches that might be used by institutions faced with describing and indexing a collection of photographs. Discusses some possible authorities for subject analysis of pictorial materials. Describes the building process focusing on compilation and maintenance, classes excluded, strucutre of the thesaurus and the question of publication

Type

a

0.0026473717 = product of:
  0.0052947435 = sum of:
    0.0052947435 = product of:
      0.010589487 = sum of:
        0.010589487 = weight(_text_:a in 5159) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.010589487 = score(doc=5159,freq=10.0), product of:
            0.053105544 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046056706 = queryNorm
            0.19940455 = fieldWeight in 5159, product of:
              3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
                10.0 = termFreq=10.0
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=5159)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

Various shortcomings typically attend thesaural relationships: failure to support extended relevance relationships; lack of effort in identifying a common relational inventory across types of retrieval systems; limitation to binary relationships; inattention to relationships built into the meaning of lexical units. To counteract this failings, a preliminary inventory of relational structures underlying the ca. 1250 most frequently occuring English verbs is presented. The inventory is compact and corresponds to a combination of semantic role-based verb types as identified by Chafe (1970), and image schemata, as identified by Johnson (1987). The nature of hierarchical relationships among relational structures within the inventory is surveyed

Type

a

0.0026473717 = product of:
  0.0052947435 = sum of:
    0.0052947435 = product of:
      0.010589487 = sum of:
        0.010589487 = weight(_text_:a in 3447) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.010589487 = score(doc=3447,freq=10.0), product of:
            0.053105544 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046056706 = queryNorm
            0.19940455 = fieldWeight in 3447, product of:
              3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
                10.0 = termFreq=10.0
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=3447)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

The Commercial Law Thesaurus was elaborated as an application of a doctoral investigation into the application of a conceptual model to legal information retrieval. Justifies the need for such a thesaurus, briefly describes the genesis of its construction, and outlines conclusions obtained. Validates the efficiency of the thesaurus in the monitoring carried out in the legal database Juridoc and comments on the display of results as categorized, alphabetical, permuted and conceptual indexes

Footnote

Übers. d. Titels: A cognitive thesaurus for retrieval of legal commercial information

Type

a

0.0025313715 = product of:
  0.005062743 = sum of:
    0.005062743 = product of:
      0.010125486 = sum of:
        0.010125486 = weight(_text_:a in 549) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.010125486 = score(doc=549,freq=28.0), product of:
            0.053105544 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046056706 = queryNorm
            0.19066721 = fieldWeight in 549, product of:
              5.2915025 = tf(freq=28.0), with freq of:
                28.0 = termFreq=28.0
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=549)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

LCSH is known as such since 1975. It always has created headings to serve the LC collections instead of a theoretical basis. It started to replace cross reference codes by thesaural codes in 1986, in a mechanical fashion. It was in no way transformed into a thesaurus. Its encyclopedic coverage, its pre-coordinate concepts make it substantially distinct, considering that thesauri usually map a restricted field of knowledge and use uniterms. The questions raised are whether the new symbols comply with thesaurus standards and if they are true to one or to several models. Explanations and definitions from other lists of subject headings and thesauri, literature in the field of classification and subject indexing will provide some answers. For instance, see refers from a subject heading not used to another or others used. Exceptionally it will lead from a specific term to a more general one. Some equate a see reference with the equivalence relationship. Such relationships are pointed by USE in LCSH. See also references are made from the broader subject to narrower parts of it and also between associated subjects. They suggest lateral or vertical connexions as well as reciprocal relationships. They serve a coordination purpose for some, lay down a methodical search itinerary for others. Since their inception in the 1950's thesauri have been devised for indexing and retrieving information in the fields of science and technology. Eventually they attended to a number of social sciences and humanities. Research derived from thesauri was voluminous. Numerous guidelines are designed. They did not discriminate between the "hard" sciences and the social sciences. RT relationships are widely but diversely used in numerous controlled vocabularies. LCSH's aim is to achieve a list almost free of RT and SA references. It thus restricts relationships to BT/NT, USE and UF. This raises the question as to whether all fields of knowledge can "fit" in the Procrustean bed of RT/NT, i.e., genus/species relationships. Standard codes were devised. It was soon realized that BT/NT, well suited to the genus/species couple could not signal a whole-part relationship. In LCSH, BT and NT function as reciprocals, the whole-part relationship is taken into account by ISO. It is amply elaborated upon by authors. The part-whole connexion is sometimes studied apart. The decision to replace cross reference codes was an improvement. Relations can now be distinguished through the distinct needs of numerous fields of knowledge are not attended to. Topic inclusion, and topic-subtopic, could provide the missing link where genus/species or whole/part are inadequate. Distinct codes, BT/NT and whole/part, should be provided. Sorting relationships with mechanical means can only lead to confusion.

Type

a

0.0024857575 = product of:
  0.004971515 = sum of:
    0.004971515 = product of:
      0.00994303 = sum of:
        0.00994303 = weight(_text_:a in 5813) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.00994303 = score(doc=5813,freq=12.0), product of:
            0.053105544 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046056706 = queryNorm
            0.18723148 = fieldWeight in 5813, 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=5813)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

Shows that it is possible to construct a lexical database by combining material from a number of machine-readable sources. Discusses the kind of lexical information required for applications in information retrieval and in other natural language processing areas, such as database interfaces and automatic filing systems. Describes the organization of the lexical database which is stored in an Oracle relational database management system and the design of the tables that comprise the database. In addition to the traditional alphabetic listing, access is privided from roots to derived forms and from derived forms to roots, and also through lexical and semantic relations between words, so that the database functions as a thesaurus as well as a dictionary. The database is designed to be open-ended and self-defined. Every attribute of every table is defined in the database itself. The lexical database can easily be extended through an SQL forms interface that facilitates additions to the tables

Type

a

0.0024857575 = product of:
  0.004971515 = sum of:
    0.004971515 = product of:
      0.00994303 = sum of:
        0.00994303 = weight(_text_:a in 2735) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.00994303 = score(doc=2735,freq=12.0), product of:
            0.053105544 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046056706 = queryNorm
            0.18723148 = fieldWeight in 2735, 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=2735)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

An approach to accessing databases, which makes extensive use of structured thesaurus views for presenting and searching a large bibliographic database through progressive refinement, is being investigated in a research project which is seeking to apply usability criteria as the determinant for interface design. It aims to investigate measurements of retrieval performance in an application of graphical user interface techniques using multi-windowed layered attribute value aggregation, including those provided by a structured thesaurus, to access bibliographic databases. This paper reports on the progress made in the first year of the project of the application of usability methodologies, the revision of a preliminray design and the resulting prototype development. Implications for more widespread applications are discussed

Type

a

0.0024857575 = product of:
  0.004971515 = sum of:
    0.004971515 = product of:
      0.00994303 = sum of:
        0.00994303 = weight(_text_:a in 3504) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.00994303 = score(doc=3504,freq=12.0), product of:
            0.053105544 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046056706 = queryNorm
            0.18723148 = fieldWeight in 3504, 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=3504)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

Thesauri are valuable structures for Information Retrieval systems. A thesaurus provides a precise and controlled vocabulary which serves to coordinate dacument indexing and document retrieval. In both indexing and retrieval, a thesaurus may be used to select the most appropriate terms. Additionally, the thesaurus can assist the searcher in reformulating search strategies if required. Examines the important features of thesauri. This should allow the reader to differentiate between thesauri. Next, a brief overview of the manual thesaurus construction process is given. 2 major approaches for automatic thesaurus construction have been selected for detailed examination. The first is on thesaurus construction from collections of documents,a nd the 2nd, on thesaurus construction by merging existing thesauri. These 2 methods were selected since they rely on statistical techniques alone and are also significantly different from each other. Programs written in C language accompany the discussion of these approaches

Type

a

0.0024857575 = product of:
  0.004971515 = sum of:
    0.004971515 = product of:
      0.00994303 = sum of:
        0.00994303 = weight(_text_:a in 5202) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.00994303 = score(doc=5202,freq=12.0), product of:
            0.053105544 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046056706 = queryNorm
            0.18723148 = fieldWeight in 5202, 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=5202)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

In this article, we report research on an algorithmic approach to alleviating search uncertainty in a large information space. Grounded on object filtering, automatic indexing, and co-occurence analysis, we performed a large-scale experiment using a parallel supercomputer (SGI Power Challenge) to analyze 400.000+ abstracts in an INSPEC computer engineering collection. Two system-generated thesauri, one based on a combined object filtering and automatic indexing method, and the other based on automatic indexing only, were compaed with the human-generated INSPEC subject thesaurus. Our user evaluation revealed that the system-generated thesauri were better than the INSPEC thesaurus in 'concept recall', but in 'concept precision' the 3 thesauri were comparable. Our analysis also revealed that the terms suggested by the 3 thesauri were complementary and could be used to significantly increase 'variety' in search terms the thereby reduce search uncertainty

Type

a

0.0024857575 = product of:
  0.004971515 = sum of:
    0.004971515 = product of:
      0.00994303 = sum of:
        0.00994303 = weight(_text_:a in 55) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.00994303 = score(doc=55,freq=12.0), product of:
            0.053105544 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046056706 = queryNorm
            0.18723148 = fieldWeight in 55, 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=55)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

The terminological consistency of indexers working with a thesaurus as indexing aid remains low. This suggests that indexers cannot perceive easily or very clearly the meaning of each descriptor available as index term. This paper presents the background nd some of the findings of a small scale experiment designed to study the effect on interindexer terminological consistency of modifying the nature of the semantic information given with descriptors in a thesaurus. The study also provided some insights into the respective usefulness of standardized definitions and of traditional networks of hierarchical and associative relationships as means of providing essential meaning information in the thesaurus used as indexing aid

Type

a

0.0024857575 = product of:
  0.004971515 = sum of:
    0.004971515 = product of:
      0.00994303 = sum of:
        0.00994303 = weight(_text_:a in 145) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.00994303 = score(doc=145,freq=12.0), product of:
            0.053105544 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046056706 = queryNorm
            0.18723148 = fieldWeight in 145, 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=145)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

For more than thirty years thesauri have been valuable tools in information retrieval. Originally, the basic function of the thesauri was to help the indexer to transform concepts and their relationships, as expressed in the language of documents, into the more regularised indexing language of catalogues and databases. In the nineties another important purpose of the thesauri is to guide the searcher to the best search terms. In spite of the new role, the design of the thesauri has remained more or less stable. This paper explores the demands which are put on the thesauri in relation to searching. Findings are presented in the form of generalisations and moreover illustrated in relation to a real-life situation. Suggestions for improved functionality are presented in the form of a prototype of a thesaurus record. The new role as a conceptual searching tool is also influencing the construction process. Therefore, the paper ends up with a discussion of new methods for thesaurus construction

Type

a

0.0024857575 = product of:
  0.004971515 = sum of:
    0.004971515 = product of:
      0.00994303 = sum of:
        0.00994303 = weight(_text_:a in 2176) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.00994303 = score(doc=2176,freq=12.0), product of:
            0.053105544 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046056706 = queryNorm
            0.18723148 = fieldWeight in 2176, 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=2176)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

The ISO 2788 guidelines for monolingual thesauri contain a differentiation of "the hierarchical relationship" into "generic", "partitive", and "instance", which, for purposes of document retrieval, was deemed adequate. However, ontologies, designed as language inventories for a wider scope of knowledge representation, are based on all these and some more logical differentiations. Rereading the ISO 2788 standard and inspecting the published Cyc Upper Ontology, it is argued that the adoption of the document-retrieval definition of subsumption generally prevents the conception or use of a thesaurus as a substructure of an ontology of the new kind as constructed for AI applications. When a thesaurus is used for fact description and inference on fact descriptions, the instance-of relationship too should be reconsidered: It may also link concepts and metaconcepts, and then its distinction from subsumption is needed. The treatment of the instance-of relationship in thesauri, the Cyc Upper Ontology, and WordNet is described from this perspective

Type

a

0.0024857575 = product of:
  0.004971515 = sum of:
    0.004971515 = product of:
      0.00994303 = sum of:
        0.00994303 = weight(_text_:a in 5362) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.00994303 = score(doc=5362,freq=12.0), product of:
            0.053105544 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046056706 = queryNorm
            0.18723148 = fieldWeight in 5362, 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=5362)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

The goal of this study is to evaluate, compare, and contrast how facet analysis is used to construct the systematic or faceted displays of a selection of information retrieval thesauri. More specifically, the study seeks to examine which principles of facet analysis are used in the thesauri, and the extent to which different thesauri apply these principles in the same way. A measuring instrument was designed for the purpose of evaluating the structure of faceted thesauri. This instrument was applied to fourteen faceted information retrieval thesauri. The study reveals that the thesauri do not share a common definition of what constitutes a facet. In some cases, the thesauri apply both enumerative-style classification and facet analysis to arrange their indexing terms. A number of the facets used in the thesauri are not homogeneous or mutually exclusive. The principle of synthesis is used in only 50% of the thesauri, and no one citation order is used consistently by the thesauri.

Type

a