Search (44 results, page 1 of 3)

0.037330892 = product of:
  0.09332723 = sum of:
    0.07988574 = weight(_text_:context in 156) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.07988574 = score(doc=156,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.17622331 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.14465 = idf(docFreq=1904, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04251826 = queryNorm
        0.4533211 = fieldWeight in 156, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          4.14465 = idf(docFreq=1904, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=156)
    0.013441487 = product of:
      0.04032446 = sum of:
        0.04032446 = weight(_text_:22 in 156) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.04032446 = score(doc=156,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.1488917 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04251826 = queryNorm
            0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 156, 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=156)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.4 = coord(2/5)

Abstract

The present study investigates the ability of a bibliometric based semi-automatic method to select candidate thesaurus terms from citation contexts. The method consists of document co-citation analysis, citation context analysis, and noun phrase parsing. The investigation is carried out within the specialty area of periodontology. The results clearly demonstrate that the method is able to select important candidate thesaurus terms within the chosen specialty area.

Date

8. 3.2007 19:55:22

Source

Context: nature, impact and role. 5th International Conference an Conceptions of Library and Information Sciences, CoLIS 2005 Glasgow, UK, June 2005. Ed. by F. Crestani u. I. Ruthven

0.023369322 = product of:
  0.058423303 = sum of:
    0.050742455 = weight(_text_:index in 3487) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.050742455 = score(doc=3487,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.18579477 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.369764 = idf(docFreq=1520, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04251826 = queryNorm
        0.27311024 = fieldWeight in 3487, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          4.369764 = idf(docFreq=1520, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=3487)
    0.0076808496 = product of:
      0.023042548 = sum of:
        0.023042548 = weight(_text_:22 in 3487) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.023042548 = score(doc=3487,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.1488917 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04251826 = queryNorm
            0.15476047 = fieldWeight in 3487, 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=3487)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.4 = coord(2/5)

Abstract

Das Buch gibt einen umfassenden Überblick über vorhandene Thesauri und Klassifikationen. Es liefert detaillierte Beschreibungen zu mehr als 150 Klassifikationen und Thesauri aus Naturwissenschaften, Technik, Wirtschaft und Patentwesen. Da gegenwärtig eine aktuelle Zusammenstellung international verfügbarer Thesauri und Klassifikationen fehlt, schließt das vorliegende Buch diese Lücke und kann somit dazu beitragen, Doppelarbeit bei der Erstellung von Thesauri und Klassifikationen zu verhindern und den intellektuellen wie kostenintensiven Aufwand zu minimieren. Zusätzlich bietet dieses Nachschlagewerk mit einem umfangreichen Index den Informationsspezialisten Unterstützung bei der Formulierung präziser Rechercheanfragen, indem es Informationen über Vorhandensein, Aufbau und Verfügbarkeit der Thesauri und Klassifikationen bereitstellt, die für die Recherche genutzt werden können. Das Buch wendet sich an alle Information Professionals, die Dokumentationssprachen aufbauen und nutzen.

Footnote

Rez. in: Information: Wissenschaft & Praxis 56(2005) H.5/6, S.337 (W. Ratzek): "Bettina Brühl legt mit "Thesauri und Klassifikationen" ein Fleißarbeit vor. Das Buch mit seiner Auswahl von über 150 Klassifikationen und Thesauri aus Naturwissenschaft, Technik, Wirtschaft und Patenwesen macht es zu einem brauchbaren Nachschlagewerk, zumal auch ein umfassender Index nach Sachgebieten, nach Datenbanken und nach Klassifikationen und Thesauri angeboten wird. Nach einer 13-seitigen Einführung (Kapitel 1 und 2) folgt mit dem 3. Kapitel die "Darstellung von Klassifikationen und Thesauri", im wesentlichen aus den Beschreibungen der Hersteller zusammengestellt. Hier werden Dokumentationssprachen der Fachgebiete - Naturwissenschaften (3.1) und deren Spezialisierungen wie zum Beispiel "Biowissenschaften und Biotechnologie", "Chemie" oder "Umwelt und Ökonomie", aber auch "Mathematik und Informatik" (?) auf 189 Seiten vorgestellt, - Technik mit zum Beispiel "Fachordnung Technik", "Subject Categories (INIS/ ETDE) mit 17 Seiten verhältnismäßig knapp abgehandelt, - Wirtschaft mit "Branchen-Codes", "Product-Codes", "Länder-Codes"",Fachklas-sifikationen" und "Thesauri" ausführlich auf 57 Seiten präsentiert, - Patente und Normen mit zum Beispiel "Europäische Patentklassifikation" oder "International Patent Classification" auf 33 Seiten umrissen. Jedes Teilgebiet wird mit einer kurzen Beschreibung eingeleitet. Danach folgen die jeweiligen Beschreibungen mit den Merkmalen: "Anschrift des Erstellers", "Themen-gebiet(e)", "Sprache", "Verfügbarkeit", "An-wendung" und "Ouelle(n)". "Das Buch wendet sich an alle Information Professionals, die Dokumentationssprachen aufbauen und nutzen" heißt es in der Verlagsinformation. Zwar ist es nicht notwendig, die informationswissenschaftlichen Aspekte der Klassifikationen und Thesauri abzuhandeln, aber ein Hinweis auf die Bedeutung der Information und Dokumentation und/oder der Informationswissenschaft wäre schon angebracht, um in der Welt der Informations- und Wissenswirtschaft zu demonstrieren, welchen Beitrag unsere Profession leistet. Andernfalls bleibt das Blickfeld eingeschränkt und der Anschluss an neuere Entwicklungen ausgeblendet. Dieser Anknüpfungspunkt wäre beispielsweise durch einen Exkurs über Topic Map/Semantic Web gegeben. Der Verlag liefert mit der Herausgabe die ses Kompendiums einen nützlichen ersten Baustein zu einem umfassenden Verzeichnis von Thesauri und Klassifikationen."

Series

Materialien zur Information und Dokumentation; Bd.22

0.017591758 = product of:
  0.043979395 = sum of:
    0.024209036 = weight(_text_:context in 1169) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.024209036 = score(doc=1169,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.17622331 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.14465 = idf(docFreq=1904, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04251826 = queryNorm
        0.13737704 = fieldWeight in 1169, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          4.14465 = idf(docFreq=1904, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0234375 = fieldNorm(doc=1169)
    0.01977036 = weight(_text_:system in 1169) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.01977036 = score(doc=1169,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.13391352 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.1495528 = idf(docFreq=5152, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04251826 = queryNorm
        0.14763528 = fieldWeight in 1169, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          3.1495528 = idf(docFreq=5152, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0234375 = fieldNorm(doc=1169)
  0.4 = coord(2/5)

Abstract

T.2: The ability to identify and locate relevant information among vast collections and other resources is a major and pressing challenge today. Several different types of vocabulary are in use for this purpose. Some of the most widely used vocabularies were designed a hundred years ago and have been evolving steadily. A different generation of vocabularies is now emerging, designed to exploit the electronic media more effectively. A good understanding of the previous generation is still essential for effective access to collections indexed with them. An important object of ISO 25964 as a whole is to support data exchange and other forms of interoperability in circumstances in which more than one structured vocabulary is applied within one retrieval system or network. Sometimes one vocabulary has to be mapped to another, and it is important to understand both the potential and the limitations of such mappings. In other systems, a thesaurus is mapped to a classification scheme, or an ontology to a thesaurus. Comprehensive interoperability needs to cover the whole range of vocabulary types, whether young or old. Concepts in different vocabularies are related only in that they have the same or similar meaning. However, the meaning can be found in a number of different aspects within each particular type of structured vocabulary: - within terms or captions selected in different languages; - in the notation assigned indicating a place within a larger hierarchy; - in the definition, scope notes, history notes and other notes that explain the significance of that concept; and - in explicit relationships to other concepts or entities within the same vocabulary. In order to create mappings from one structured vocabulary to another it is first necessary to understand, within the context of each different type of structured vocabulary, the significance and relative importance of each of the different elements in defining the meaning of that particular concept. ISO 25964-1 describes the key characteristics of thesauri along with additional advice on best practice. ISO 25964-2 focuses on other types of vocabulary and does not attempt to cover all aspects of good practice. It concentrates on those aspects which need to be understood if one of the vocabularies is to work effectively alongside one or more of the others. Recognizing that a new standard cannot be applied to some existing vocabularies, this part of ISO 25964 provides informative description alongside the recommendations, the aim of which is to enable users and system developers to interpret and implement the existing vocabularies effectively. The remainder of ISO 25964-2 deals with the principles and practicalities of establishing mappings between vocabularies.

0.015222736 = product of:
  0.07611368 = sum of:
    0.07611368 = weight(_text_:index in 5888) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.07611368 = score(doc=5888,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.18579477 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.369764 = idf(docFreq=1520, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04251826 = queryNorm
        0.40966535 = fieldWeight in 5888, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          4.369764 = idf(docFreq=1520, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=5888)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)

Abstract

Eutelis Consult ist eines der führenden Beratungsunternehmen auf dem Sektor der Telekommunikation und der Mehrwertdienste. Eutelis Consult erbringt national und international Beratungsdienstleistungen für Anbieter von Telekommunikations- und Mehrwertdiensten, für Netzbetreiber, Hersteller von Vermittlungssystemen und Endgeräten, Anwender und Nutzer von Telekommunikationsdiensten sowie öffentliche Auftraggeber. Weitere Beratungsschwerpunkte von Eutelis Consult konzentrieren sich auf die regulatorischen Rahmenbedingungen, Smartcardanwendungen, die Personalberatung sowie auf die Finanzierung junger Unternehmen in diesen Sektoren. Von der für das EUTELIS-interne Content Management verantwortlichen Abteilung wird aktuell ein Telecom Thesaurus erstellt, der der Indexierung aller internen Projektberichte und der dokumentierten externen Materialien dient. Grundlage ist ein Lotus Notes & Domino-basiertes internes Netz. Die Entstehungsgeschichte des Thesaurus, Experimente mit maschineller Generierung von Thesaurus-Relationen, maschineller Generierung von Thesaurus-Kandidaten und dem Einblick in den derzeitigen Stand mit dem Entwicklungstool IC INDEX 5.0 werden vermittelt

Object

Index-5.0

0.014587852 = product of:
  0.07293926 = sum of:
    0.07293926 = weight(_text_:system in 3817) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.07293926 = score(doc=3817,freq=10.0), product of:
        0.13391352 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.1495528 = idf(docFreq=5152, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04251826 = queryNorm
        0.5446744 = fieldWeight in 3817, product of:
          3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
            10.0 = termFreq=10.0
          3.1495528 = idf(docFreq=5152, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=3817)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)

Abstract

Reports an integrated system that employs an open structure for managing the distributed resources (thesauri and databases) and integrates a thesaurus management system with a crossthesaurus search system. Describes the functions of the system that highlight the unique design for the networked environment.

0.012912715 = product of:
  0.032281786 = sum of:
    0.016139356 = weight(_text_:context in 2924) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.016139356 = score(doc=2924,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.17622331 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.14465 = idf(docFreq=1904, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04251826 = queryNorm
        0.09158469 = fieldWeight in 2924, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          4.14465 = idf(docFreq=1904, maxDocs=44218)
          0.015625 = fieldNorm(doc=2924)
    0.016142432 = weight(_text_:system in 2924) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.016142432 = score(doc=2924,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.13391352 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.1495528 = idf(docFreq=5152, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04251826 = queryNorm
        0.12054371 = fieldWeight in 2924, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          3.1495528 = idf(docFreq=5152, maxDocs=44218)
          0.015625 = fieldNorm(doc=2924)
  0.4 = coord(2/5)

Abstract

Many information professionals working in small units today fail to find the published tools for subject-based organization that are appropriate to their local needs, whether they are archivists, special librarians, information officers, or knowledge or content managers. Large established standards for document description and organization are too unwieldy, unnecessarily detailed, or too expensive to install and maintain. In other cases the available systems are insufficient for a specialist environment, or don't bring things together in a helpful way. A purpose built, in-house system would seem to be the answer, but too often the skills necessary to create one are lacking. This practical text examines the criteria relevant to the selection of a subject-management system, describes the characteristics of some common types of subject tool, and takes the novice step by step through the process of creating a system for a specialist environment. The methodology employed is a standard technique for the building of a thesaurus that incidentally creates a compatible classification or taxonomy, both of which may be used in a variety of ways for document or information management. Key areas covered are: What is a thesaurus? Tools for subject access and retrieval; what a thesaurus is used for? Why use a thesaurus? Examples of thesauri; the structure of a thesaurus; thesaural relationships; practical thesaurus construction; the vocabulary of the thesaurus; building the systematic structure; conversion to alphabetic format; forms of entry in the thesaurus; maintaining the thesaurus; thesaurus software; and; the wider environment. Essential for the practising information professional, this guide is also valuable for students of library and information science.

Footnote

Weitere Rez. in: New Library World 108(2007) nos.3/4, S.190-191 (K.V. Trickey): "Vanda has provided a very useful work that will enable any reader who is prepared to follow her instruction to produce a thesaurus that will be a quality language-based subject access tool that will make the task of information retrieval easier and more effective. Once again I express my gratitude to Vanda for producing another excellent book." - Electronic Library 24(2006) no.6, S.866-867 (A.G. Smith): "Essential thesaurus construction is an ideal instructional text, with clear bullet point summaries at the ends of sections, and relevant and up to date references, putting thesauri in context with the general theory of information retrieval. But it will also be a valuable reference for any information professional developing or using a controlled vocabulary." - KO 33(2006) no.4, S.215-216 (M.P. Satija)

0.011412249 = product of:
  0.057061244 = sum of:
    0.057061244 = weight(_text_:context in 1520) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.057061244 = score(doc=1520,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.17622331 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.14465 = idf(docFreq=1904, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04251826 = queryNorm
        0.32380077 = fieldWeight in 1520, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          4.14465 = idf(docFreq=1904, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1520)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)

Abstract

This paper discusses issues concerning the augmentation of thesaurus relationships, in light of new application possibilities for retrieval. We first discuss a case study that explored the retrieval potential of an augmented set of thesaurus relationships by specialising standard relationships into richer subtypes, in particular hierarchical geographical containment and the associative relationship. We then locate this work in a broader context by reviewing various attempts to build taxonomies of thesaurus relationships, and conclude by discussing the feasibility of hierarchically augmenting the core set of thesaurus relationships, particularly the associative relationship. We discuss the possibility of enriching the specification and semantics of Related Term (RT relationships), while maintaining compatibility with traditional thesauri via a limited hierarchical extension of the associative (and hierarchical) relationships. This would be facilitated by distinguishing the type of term from the (sub)type of relationship and explicitly specifying semantic categories for terms following a faceted approach. We first illustrate how hierarchical spatial relationships can be used to provide more flexible retrieval for queries incorporating place names in applications employing online gazetteers and geographical thesauri. We then employ a set of experimental scenarios to investigate key issues affecting use of the associative (RT) thesaurus relationships in semantic distance measures. Previous work has noted the potential of RTs in thesaurus search aids but also the problem of uncontrolled expansion of query term sets. Results presented in this paper suggest the potential for taking account of the hierarchical context of an RT link and specialisations of the RT relationship

0.011299702 = product of:
  0.056498513 = sum of:
    0.056498513 = weight(_text_:system in 2257) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.056498513 = score(doc=2257,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.13391352 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.1495528 = idf(docFreq=5152, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04251826 = queryNorm
        0.42190298 = fieldWeight in 2257, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          3.1495528 = idf(docFreq=5152, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=2257)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)

Abstract

For years, Mexico has had a distance learning system backed by television-signal-transmitted videos. The change to digital and computer transmission demands organizing the information system and its subject contents through a thesaurus. To prepare the thesaurus, an evaluation of existing thesauri and standards for data exchange was carried out, aimed at retrieving subject contents and scheduling broadcasting. Methodology for evaluating thesauri was proposed, compared with a virtual educational platform and a basic structure for setting up the information system was recommended.

0.0107641 = product of:
  0.0538205 = sum of:
    0.0538205 = weight(_text_:index in 131) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0538205 = score(doc=131,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.18579477 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.369764 = idf(docFreq=1520, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04251826 = queryNorm
        0.28967714 = fieldWeight in 131, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          4.369764 = idf(docFreq=1520, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=131)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)

Abstract

In this paper, after an introduction about problems of multilingual information languages, the rules and recommendations of the Guidelines for the establishment and development of multilingual thesauri for non-equivalence and partial equivalence of terms in different languages are discussed. Artificial terms are not very useful in searching, because most users are not willing to use a thesaurus to find the right descriptor. On the other hand indexers need guidance on how to index and therefore need a thesaurus with all desirable and necessary relations. It is suggested that bibliographic online systems can take over some of the functions for the searcher from the thesaurus and that a few new relations could be helpful to an indexer

0.0107641 = product of:
  0.0538205 = sum of:
    0.0538205 = weight(_text_:index in 1148) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0538205 = score(doc=1148,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.18579477 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.369764 = idf(docFreq=1520, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04251826 = queryNorm
        0.28967714 = fieldWeight in 1148, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          4.369764 = idf(docFreq=1520, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1148)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)

Abstract

Relationships between the terms in thesauri and Indexes are the subject of national and international standards. The standards for thesauri enumerate and provide criteria for three basic types of relationship: equivalence, hierarchical, and associative. Standards and guidelines for indexes draw an the thesaurus standards to provide less detailed guidance for showing relationships between the terms used in an Index. The international standard for multilingual thesauri adds recommendations for assuring equal treatment of the languages of a thesaurus. The present standards were developed when lookup and search were essentially manual, and the value of the kinds of relationships has never been determined. It is not clear whether users understand or can use the distinctions between kinds of relationships. On the other hand, sophisticated text analysis systems may be able both to assist with development of more powerful term relationship schemes and to use the relationships to improve retrieval.

0.0107641 = product of:
  0.0538205 = sum of:
    0.0538205 = weight(_text_:index in 924) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0538205 = score(doc=924,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.18579477 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.369764 = idf(docFreq=1520, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04251826 = queryNorm
        0.28967714 = fieldWeight in 924, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          4.369764 = idf(docFreq=1520, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=924)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)

Abstract

A thesaurus and an ontology provide a set of structured terms, phrases, and metadata, often in a hierarchical arrangement, that may be used to index, search, and mine documents. We describe the decisions that should be made when including a term, deciding whether a term should be subdivided into its subclasses, or determining which of more than one set of possible subclasses should be used. Based on retrospective measurements or estimates of future performance when using thesaurus terms in document ordering, decisions are made so as to maximize performance. These decisions may be used in the automatic construction of a thesaurus. The evaluation of an existing thesaurus is described, consistent with the decision criteria developed here. These kinds of user-focused decision-theoretic techniques may be applied to other hierarchical applications, such as faceted classification systems used in information architecture or the use of hierarchical terms in "breadcrumb navigation".

0.009683615 = product of:
  0.04841807 = sum of:
    0.04841807 = weight(_text_:context in 1147) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.04841807 = score(doc=1147,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.17622331 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.14465 = idf(docFreq=1904, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04251826 = queryNorm
        0.27475408 = fieldWeight in 1147, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          4.14465 = idf(docFreq=1904, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1147)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)

Abstract

Because the multilingual thesaurus has a critical role to play in the global networked information world, its relational structure must come under close scrutiny. Traditionally, identity of relational structures has been sought for the different language versions of a multilingual thesaurus, often leading to the artificialization of all target languages. The various types of cross-lingual and intralingual relations found in thesauri are examined in the context of two questions: Are all types of thesaural relations transferable from one language to another? and Are the two members of a valid relation in a source language always the same in the target language(s)? Two options for resolving semantic conflicts in multilingual thesauri are presented.

0.009683615 = product of:
  0.04841807 = sum of:
    0.04841807 = weight(_text_:context in 4423) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.04841807 = score(doc=4423,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.17622331 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.14465 = idf(docFreq=1904, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04251826 = queryNorm
        0.27475408 = fieldWeight in 4423, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          4.14465 = idf(docFreq=1904, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4423)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)

Abstract

The paper introduces bibliometrics to the research area of knowledge organization - more precisely in relation to construction and maintenance of thesauri. As such, the paper reviews related work that has been of inspiration for the assembly of a semi-automatic, bibliometric-based, approach for construction and maintenance. Similarly, the paper discusses the methodical considerations behind the approach. Eventually, the semi-automatic approach is used to verify the applicability of bibliometric methods as a supplement to construction and maintenance of thesauri. In the context of knowledge organization, the paper outlines two fundamental approaches to knowledge organization, that is, the manual intellectual approach and the automatic algorithmic approach. Bibliometric methods belong to the automatic algorithmic approach, though bibliometrics do have special characteristics that are substantially different from other methods within this approach.

0.0092261685 = product of:
  0.04613084 = sum of:
    0.04613084 = weight(_text_:system in 4431) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.04613084 = score(doc=4431,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.13391352 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.1495528 = idf(docFreq=5152, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04251826 = queryNorm
        0.34448233 = fieldWeight in 4431, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          3.1495528 = idf(docFreq=5152, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=4431)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)

Abstract

This paper describes the Laurin thesaurus, which is used for indexing and searching in the Laurin system, a software package for digital clipping archives. As a multilingual thesaurus it complies with the corresponding standards, though presenting some approaches going beyond some of the standards' recommendations. The Laurin thesaurus integrates all kind of indexing terms, not only keywords, but proper names as well. The system of categories and relationships is described in detail.

0.008970084 = product of:
  0.044850416 = sum of:
    0.044850416 = weight(_text_:index in 1462) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.044850416 = score(doc=1462,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.18579477 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.369764 = idf(docFreq=1520, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04251826 = queryNorm
        0.24139762 = fieldWeight in 1462, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          4.369764 = idf(docFreq=1520, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1462)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)

Abstract

A thesaurus is a controlled vocabulary designed to allow for effective information retrieval. It con- sists of different kinds of semantic relationships, with the aim of guiding users to the choice of the most suitable index and search terms for expressing a certain concept. The relational semantics of a thesaurus deal with methods to connect terms with related meanings and arc intended to enhance information recall capabilities. In this paper, focused on hierarchical relations, different aspects of the relational semantics of thesauri, and among them the possibility of developing richer structures, are analyzed. Thesauri are viewed as semantic tools providing, for operational purposes, the representation of the meaning of the terms. The paper stresses how theories of semantics, holding different perspectives about the nature of meaning and how it is represented, affect the design of the relational semantics of thesauri. The need for tools capable of representing the complexity of knowledge and of the semantics of terms as it occurs in the literature of their respective subject fields is advocated. It is underlined how this would contribute to improving the retrieval of information. To achieve this goal, even though in a preliminary manner, we explore the possibility of setting against the framework of thesaurus design the notions of language games and hermeneutic horizon.

0.008069678 = product of:
  0.040348392 = sum of:
    0.040348392 = weight(_text_:context in 3222) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.040348392 = score(doc=3222,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.17622331 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.14465 = idf(docFreq=1904, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04251826 = queryNorm
        0.22896172 = fieldWeight in 3222, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          4.14465 = idf(docFreq=1904, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3222)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)

Abstract

The use of thesaurus-based indexing is a common approach for increasing the performance of information retrieval. In this thesis, we examine the suitability of a thesaurus for a given set of information and evaluate improvements of existing thesauri to get better search results. On this area, we focus on two aspects: 1. We demonstrate an analysis of the indexing results achieved by an automatic document indexer and the involved thesaurus. 2. We propose a method for thesaurus evaluation which is based on a combination of statistical measures and appropriate visualization techniques that support the detection of potential problems in a thesaurus. In this chapter, we give an overview of the context of our work. Next, we briefly outline the basics of thesaurus-based information retrieval and describe the Collexis Engine that was used for our experiments. In Chapter 3, we describe two experiments in automatically indexing documents in the areas of medicine and economics with corresponding thesauri and compare the results to available manual annotations. Chapter 4 describes methods for assessing thesauri and visualizing the result in terms of a treemap. We depict examples of interesting observations supported by the method and show that we actually find critical problems. We conclude with a discussion of open questions and future research in Chapter 5.

0.0065901205 = product of:
  0.032950602 = sum of:
    0.032950602 = weight(_text_:system in 5902) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.032950602 = score(doc=5902,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.13391352 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.1495528 = idf(docFreq=5152, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04251826 = queryNorm
        0.24605882 = fieldWeight in 5902, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          3.1495528 = idf(docFreq=5152, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=5902)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)

Abstract

With networked information access to heterogeneous data sources, the problem of terminology provision and interoperability of controlled vocabulary schemes such as thesauri becomes increasingly urgent. Solutions are needed to improve the performance of full-text retrieval systems and to guide the design of controlled terminology schemes for use in structured data, including metadata. Thesauri are created in different languages, with different scope and points of view and at different levels of abstraction and detail, to accomodate access to a specific group of collections. In any wider search accessing distributed collections, the user would like to start with familiar terminology and let the system find out the correspondences to other terminologies in order to retrieve equivalent results from all addressed collections. This paper investigates possible semantic differences that may hinder the unambiguous mapping and transition from one thesaurus to another. It focusses on the differences of meaning of terms and their relations as intended by their creators for indexing and querying a specific collection, in contrast to methods investigating the statistical relevance of terms for objects in a collection. It develops a notion of optimal mapping, paying particular attention to the intellectual quality of mappings between terms from different vocabularies and to problems of polysemy. Proposals are made to limit the vagueness introduced by the transition from one vocabulary to another. The paper shows ways in which thesaurus creators can improve their methodology to meet the challenges of networked access of distributed collections created under varying conditions. For system implementers, the discussion will lead to a better understanding of the complexity of the problem

0.006523886 = product of:
  0.03261943 = sum of:
    0.03261943 = weight(_text_:system in 6773) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.03261943 = score(doc=6773,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.13391352 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.1495528 = idf(docFreq=5152, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04251826 = queryNorm
        0.2435858 = fieldWeight in 6773, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.1495528 = idf(docFreq=5152, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=6773)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)

Abstract

Members offer comments and suggest resources on programs for creating, maintaining, and publishing thesauri. Formerly a tool for writers and indexers, the thesaurus has taken on a new role as an essential component of the corporate information infrastructure. Many people are using word processor or database programs to create and maintain thesauri, while others are using specialized tools that perform consistency checks and offer special reporting capabilities. Some also use thesaurus modules integrated into another application, such as web publishing, content management, or e-commerce. This article includes material comes from our own experience, email responses from members, and comments from participants in our seminars and roundtables. There's also an introduction to thesauri in a corporate information management system

0.0055919024 = product of:
  0.027959513 = sum of:
    0.027959513 = weight(_text_:system in 3726) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.027959513 = score(doc=3726,freq=8.0), product of:
        0.13391352 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.1495528 = idf(docFreq=5152, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04251826 = queryNorm
        0.20878783 = fieldWeight in 3726, product of:
          2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
            8.0 = termFreq=8.0
          3.1495528 = idf(docFreq=5152, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0234375 = fieldNorm(doc=3726)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)

Abstract

This is a comparative analysis of the term ontology, used in the computer science domain, with the term thesaurus, used in the information science domain. The aim of the study is to establish the main convergence points of these two knowledge representation instruments and to point out their differences. In order to fulfill this goal an analytical-Synthetic method was applied to extract the meaning underlying each of the selected definitions of the instruments. The definitions were obtained from texts weIl accepted by the research community from both areas. The definitions were applied to a KWIC system in order to rotate the terms that were examined qualitatively and quantitatively. We concluded that thesauri and ontologies operate at the same knowledge level, the epistemological level, in spite of different origins and purposes.

Content

"Thesaurus" definitions taken from the information science literature "A thesaurus is a controlled vocabulary arranged in a known order and structured so that equivalence, homographic, hierarchical, and associative relationships among terms are displayed clearly and identified by standardized relationship indicators that are employed reciprocally." (ANSI/NISO Z39-19-1993) "Thesaurus is a specialized, normalized, postcoordinate language used for documentaries means, where the linguistic elements that composes it - single or composed terms - are related among themselves syntactically and semantically." (Translated into English by the authors from the original in Portuguese: Currás 1995, 88.) "[...] an authority file, which can lead the user from one concept to another via various heuristic or intuitive paths." (Howerton 1965 apud Gilchrist 1971, 5) " [...] is a lexical authority list, without notation, which differs from an alphabetical subject heading list in that the lexical units, being smaller, are more amenable to post-coordinate indexing." (Gilchrist 1971,2) [...] "a dynamic controlled vocabulary of terms related semantically and by generic relation covering a specific knowledge domain." (Translated into English by the authors from the original in Portuguese: UNESCO 1973, 6.) [...] "a terminological control device used in the translation of the natural language of the documents, from the indexers or from the users in a more restricted system language (documentation language, information language)." (Translated into English by the authors from the original in Portuguese: UNESCO 1973,6.)
"Ontologies" definitions taken from the computer science literature "[...] ontology is a representation vocabulary, often specialized to some domain or subject matter." (Chandrasekaran et al. 1999, 1) "[...] ontology is sometimes used to refer to a body of knowledge describing some domain, typically a commonsense knowledge domain, using a representation vocabulary." (Chandrasekaran et al. 1999, 1) "An ontology is a declarative model of the terms and relationships in a domain." (Eriksson et al. 1994, 1) " [...] an ontology is the (unspecified) conceptual system which we may assume to underlie a particular knowledge base." (Guarino and Giaretta 1995, 1) Ontology as a representation of a conceptual system via a logical theory". (Guarino and Giaretta 1995, 1) "An ontology is an explicit specification of a conceptualization." (Gruber 1993, 1) "[...] An ontology is a formal description of entities and their properties, relationships, constraints, behaviors." (Gruninger and Fox 1995, 1) "An ontology is set of terms, associated with definitions in natural language and, if possible, using formal relations and constraints, about some domain of interest ..." (Hovy 1998, 2) "Fach Ontology is a set of terms of interest in a particular information domain, expressed using DL ..." (Mena et al. 1996, 3) "[...] An ontology is a hierarchically structured set of terms for describing a domain that can be used as a skeletal foundation for a knowledge base." (Swartout et al. 1996, 1) "An ontology may take a variety of forms, but necessarily it will include a vocabulary of terms and some specification of their meaning." (Uschold 1996,3) "Ontologies are agreements about shared conceptualizations." (Uschold and Grunninger 1996, 6) "[...] a vocabulary of terms and a specification of their relationships." (Wiederhold 1994, 6)

0.0055919024 = product of:
  0.027959513 = sum of:
    0.027959513 = weight(_text_:system in 5008) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.027959513 = score(doc=5008,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.13391352 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.1495528 = idf(docFreq=5152, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04251826 = queryNorm
        0.20878783 = fieldWeight in 5008, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.1495528 = idf(docFreq=5152, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=5008)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)

Abstract

While information retrieval thesauri may improve search results, there is little research documenting whether general information system users employ these vocabulary tools. This article explores user comprehension and searching with thesauri. Data was gathered as part of a larger empirical query-expansion study involving the ProQuest Controlled Vocabulary. The results suggest that users' knowledge of thesauri is extremely limited. After receiving a basic thesaurus introduction, however, users indicate a desire to employ these tools. The most significant result was that users expressed a preference for thesauri employment through interactive processing or a combination of automatic and interactive processing, compared to exclusively automatic processing. This article defines information retrieval thesauri, summarizes research results, considers circumstances underlying users' knowledge and searching with thesauri, and highlights future research needs.