Search (13 results, page 1 of 1)

0.0075612543 = product of:
  0.045367524 = sum of:
    0.045367524 = weight(_text_:22 in 4184) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.045367524 = score(doc=4184,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.16751242 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
          0.047835685 = queryNorm
        0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 4184, 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=4184)
  0.16666667 = coord(1/6)

Date

22. 1.2011 10:38:28

0.0075612543 = product of:
  0.045367524 = sum of:
    0.045367524 = weight(_text_:22 in 759) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.045367524 = score(doc=759,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.16751242 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
          0.047835685 = queryNorm
        0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 759, 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=759)
  0.16666667 = coord(1/6)

Date

11. 5.2013 19:22:18

0.0075612543 = product of:
  0.045367524 = sum of:
    0.045367524 = weight(_text_:22 in 3283) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.045367524 = score(doc=3283,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.16751242 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
          0.047835685 = queryNorm
        0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 3283, 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=3283)
  0.16666667 = coord(1/6)

0.0051894207 = product of:
  0.031136524 = sum of:
    0.031136524 = weight(_text_:4 in 4815) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.031136524 = score(doc=4815,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.12981161 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.7136984 = idf(docFreq=7967, maxDocs=44218)
          0.047835685 = queryNorm
        0.23985931 = fieldWeight in 4815, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          2.7136984 = idf(docFreq=7967, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=4815)
  0.16666667 = coord(1/6)

Date

4. 9.2014 14:11:40

0.003932399 = product of:
  0.023594394 = sum of:
    0.023594394 = weight(_text_:4 in 553) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.023594394 = score(doc=553,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.12981161 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.7136984 = idf(docFreq=7967, maxDocs=44218)
          0.047835685 = queryNorm
        0.18175873 = fieldWeight in 553, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          2.7136984 = idf(docFreq=7967, maxDocs=44218)
          0.02734375 = fieldNorm(doc=553)
  0.16666667 = coord(1/6)

Abstract

Currently, a number of efforts are being carried out to integrate collections from different institutions and containing heterogeneous material. Examples of such projects are The European Library [1] and the Memory of the Netherlands [2]. A crucial point for the success of these is the availability to provide a unified access on top of the different collections, e.g. using one single vocabulary for querying or browsing the objects they contain. This is made difficult by the fact that the objects from different collections are often described using different vocabularies - thesauri, classification schemes - and are therefore not interoperable at the semantic level. To solve this problem, one can turn to semantic links - mappings - between the elements of the different vocabularies. If one knows that a concept C from a vocabulary V is semantically equivalent to a concept to a concept D from vocabulary W, then an appropriate search engine can return all the objects that were indexed against D for a query for objects described using C. We thus have an access to other collections, using a single one vocabulary. This is however an ideal situation, and hard alignment work is required to reach it. Several projects in the past have tried to implement such a solution, like MACS [3] and Renardus [4]. They have demonstrated very interesting results, but also highlighted the difficulty of aligning manually all the different vocabularies involved in practical cases, which sometimes contain hundreds of thousands of concepts. To alleviate this problem, a number of tools have been proposed in order to provide with candidate mappings between two input vocabularies, making alignment a (semi-) automatic task. Recently, the Semantic Web community has produced a lot of these alignment tools'. Several techniques are found, depending on the material they exploit: labels of concepts, structure of vocabularies, collection objects and external knowledge sources. Throughout our presentation, we will present a concrete heterogeneity case where alignment techniques have been applied to build a (pilot) browser, developed in the context of the STITCH project [5]. This browser enables a unified access to two collections of illuminated manuscripts, using the description vocabulary used in the first collection, Mandragore [6], or the one used by the second, Iconclass [7]. In our talk, we will also make the point for using unified representations the vocabulary semantic and lexical information. Additionally to ease the use of the alignment tools that have these vocabularies as input, turning to a standard representation format helps designing applications that are more generic, like the browser we demonstrate. We give pointers to SKOS [8], an open and web-enabled format currently developed by the Semantic Web community.
References [1] http:// www.theeuropeanlibrary.org [2] http://www.geheugenvannederland.nl [3] http://macs.cenl.org [4] Day, M., Koch, T., Neuroth, H.: Searching and browsing multiple subject gateways in the Renardus service. In Proceedings of the RC33 Sixth International Conference on Social Science Methodology, Amsterdam , 2005. [5] http://stitch.cs.vu.nl [6] http://mandragore.bnf.fr [7] http://www.iconclass.nl [8] www.w3.org/2004/02/skos/ 1 The Semantic Web vision supposes sharing data using different conceptualizations (ontologies), and therefore implies to tackle the semantic interoperability problem

Content

Präsentation anlässlich des 'UDC Seminar: Information Access for the Global Community, The Hague, 4-5 June 2007'

0.0038920655 = product of:
  0.023352392 = sum of:
    0.023352392 = weight(_text_:4 in 241) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.023352392 = score(doc=241,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.12981161 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.7136984 = idf(docFreq=7967, maxDocs=44218)
          0.047835685 = queryNorm
        0.17989448 = fieldWeight in 241, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          2.7136984 = idf(docFreq=7967, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=241)
  0.16666667 = coord(1/6)

Source

Cataloging and classification quarterly. 43(2006) nos.3/4, S.161-189

0.0038920655 = product of:
  0.023352392 = sum of:
    0.023352392 = weight(_text_:4 in 3731) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.023352392 = score(doc=3731,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.12981161 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.7136984 = idf(docFreq=7967, maxDocs=44218)
          0.047835685 = queryNorm
        0.17989448 = fieldWeight in 3731, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          2.7136984 = idf(docFreq=7967, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=3731)
  0.16666667 = coord(1/6)

Source

Journal of information technology research. 2(2009) no.4, p.37-53

0.0032433881 = product of:
  0.019460328 = sum of:
    0.019460328 = weight(_text_:4 in 2022) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.019460328 = score(doc=2022,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.12981161 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.7136984 = idf(docFreq=7967, maxDocs=44218)
          0.047835685 = queryNorm
        0.14991207 = fieldWeight in 2022, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          2.7136984 = idf(docFreq=7967, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2022)
  0.16666667 = coord(1/6)

Source

Bulletin of the Association for Information Science and Technology. 41(2015) no.4, S.10-12

0.0032433881 = product of:
  0.019460328 = sum of:
    0.019460328 = weight(_text_:4 in 2026) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.019460328 = score(doc=2026,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.12981161 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.7136984 = idf(docFreq=7967, maxDocs=44218)
          0.047835685 = queryNorm
        0.14991207 = fieldWeight in 2026, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          2.7136984 = idf(docFreq=7967, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2026)
  0.16666667 = coord(1/6)

Source

Bulletin of the Association for Information Science and Technology. 41(2015) no.4, S.34-39

0.0032433881 = product of:
  0.019460328 = sum of:
    0.019460328 = weight(_text_:4 in 600) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.019460328 = score(doc=600,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.12981161 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.7136984 = idf(docFreq=7967, maxDocs=44218)
          0.047835685 = queryNorm
        0.14991207 = fieldWeight in 600, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          2.7136984 = idf(docFreq=7967, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=600)
  0.16666667 = coord(1/6)

Source

Journal of documentation. 77(2021) no.4, S.926-945

0.0025947103 = product of:
  0.015568262 = sum of:
    0.015568262 = weight(_text_:4 in 3398) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.015568262 = score(doc=3398,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.12981161 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.7136984 = idf(docFreq=7967, maxDocs=44218)
          0.047835685 = queryNorm
        0.11992966 = fieldWeight in 3398, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          2.7136984 = idf(docFreq=7967, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=3398)
  0.16666667 = coord(1/6)

Content

This paper is based on a talk given at "Information Access for the Global Community, An International Seminar on the Universal Decimal Classification" held on 4-5 June 2007 in The Hague, The Netherlands. An abstract of this talk will be published in Extensions and Corrections to the UDC, an annual publication of the UDC consortium. Beitrag eines Themenheftes "Digital libraries and the semantic web: context, applications and research".

0.0025947103 = product of:
  0.015568262 = sum of:
    0.015568262 = weight(_text_:4 in 5329) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.015568262 = score(doc=5329,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.12981161 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.7136984 = idf(docFreq=7967, maxDocs=44218)
          0.047835685 = queryNorm
        0.11992966 = fieldWeight in 5329, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          2.7136984 = idf(docFreq=7967, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=5329)
  0.16666667 = coord(1/6)

Abstract

This book describes efficient and effective techniques for harnessing the power of Linked Data by tackling the various aspects of managing its growing volume: storing, querying, reasoning, provenance management and benchmarking. To this end, Chapter 1 introduces the main concepts of the Semantic Web and Linked Data and provides a roadmap for the book. Next, Chapter 2 briefly presents the basic concepts underpinning Linked Data technologies that are discussed in the book. Chapter 3 then offers an overview of various techniques and systems for centrally querying RDF datasets, and Chapter 4 outlines various techniques and systems for efficiently querying large RDF datasets in distributed environments. Subsequently, Chapter 5 explores how streaming requirements are addressed in current, state-of-the-art RDF stream data processing. Chapter 6 covers performance and scaling issues of distributed RDF reasoning systems, while Chapter 7 details benchmarks for RDF query engines and instance matching systems. Chapter 8 addresses the provenance management for Linked Data and presents the different provenance models developed. Lastly, Chapter 9 offers a brief summary, highlighting and providing insights into some of the open challenges and research directions. Providing an updated overview of methods, technologies and systems related to Linked Data this book is mainly intended for students and researchers who are interested in the Linked Data domain. It enables students to gain an understanding of the foundations and underpinning technologies and standards for Linked Data, while researchers benefit from the in-depth coverage of the emerging and ongoing advances in Linked Data storing, querying, reasoning, and provenance management systems. Further, it serves as a starting point to tackle the next research challenges in the domain of Linked Data management.

0.0022703717 = product of:
  0.013622229 = sum of:
    0.013622229 = weight(_text_:4 in 5903) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.013622229 = score(doc=5903,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.12981161 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.7136984 = idf(docFreq=7967, maxDocs=44218)
          0.047835685 = queryNorm
        0.10493845 = fieldWeight in 5903, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          2.7136984 = idf(docFreq=7967, maxDocs=44218)
          0.02734375 = fieldNorm(doc=5903)
  0.16666667 = coord(1/6)

Content

RDF Data Model At the core of RDF is a model for representing named properties and their values. These properties serve both to represent attributes of resources (and in this sense correspond to usual attribute-value-pairs) and to represent relationships between resources. The RDF data model is a syntax-independent way of representing RDF statements. RDF statements that are syntactically very different could mean the same thing. This concept of equivalence in meaning is very important when performing queries, aggregation and a number of other tasks at which RDF is aimed. The equivalence is defined in a clean machine understandable way. Two pieces of RDF are equivalent if and only if their corresponding data model representations are the same. Table of contents 1. Introduction 2. RDF Data Model 3. RDF Grammar 4. Signed RDF 5. Examples 6. Appendix A: Brief Explanation of XML Namespaces