Search (5 results, page 1 of 1)

0.016691115 = product of:
  0.10014668 = sum of:
    0.08248526 = weight(_text_:systeme in 4331) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.08248526 = score(doc=4331,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.17439179 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.3512506 = idf(docFreq=569, maxDocs=44218)
          0.032588977 = queryNorm
        0.4729882 = fieldWeight in 4331, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          5.3512506 = idf(docFreq=569, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=4331)
    0.017661426 = product of:
      0.035322852 = sum of:
        0.035322852 = weight(_text_:22 in 4331) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.035322852 = score(doc=4331,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.11412105 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.032588977 = queryNorm
            0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 4331, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=4331)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.16666667 = coord(2/12)

Abstract

Das Semantic Web - bzw. Linked Data - hat das Potenzial, die Verfügbarkeit von Daten und Wissen, sowie den Zugriff darauf zu revolutionieren. Einen großen Beitrag dazu können Wissensorganisationssysteme wie Thesauri leisten, die die Daten inhaltlich erschließen und strukturieren. Leider sind immer noch viele dieser Systeme lediglich in Buchform oder in speziellen Anwendungen verfügbar. Wie also lassen sie sich für das Semantic Web nutzen? Das Simple Knowledge Organization System (SKOS) bietet eine Möglichkeit, die Wissensorganisationssysteme in eine Form zu "übersetzen", die im Web zitiert und mit anderen Resourcen verknüpft werden kann.

Date

15. 3.2011 19:21:22

0.0066457465 = product of:
  0.03987448 = sum of:
    0.02662841 = weight(_text_:internet in 2118) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.02662841 = score(doc=2118,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.09621047 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.9522398 = idf(docFreq=6276, maxDocs=44218)
          0.032588977 = queryNorm
        0.27677247 = fieldWeight in 2118, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          2.9522398 = idf(docFreq=6276, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2118)
    0.01324607 = product of:
      0.02649214 = sum of:
        0.02649214 = weight(_text_:22 in 2118) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.02649214 = score(doc=2118,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.11412105 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.032588977 = queryNorm
            0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 2118, 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=2118)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.16666667 = coord(2/12)

Abstract

Während das Internet vor noch nicht allzu langer Zeit hauptsächlich ein weiteres Informationsmedium darstellte, so explodieren die technischen Möglichkeiten derzeit förmlich. Diese stärken nicht nur den gegenseitigen Austausch der Nutzer. Sie alle vermessen unsere täglichen Gewohnheiten - auf sehr vielfältige Art und Weise. Die Mechanismen, die das gekaufte Web ausmachen, werden hierdurch komplexer. In den meisten neuen Technologien und Anwendungen verbergen sich Wege, die Verbraucherverführung zu perfektionieren. Nicht wenige davon dürften zudem für die Politik und andere Interessensverbände von Bedeutung sein, als alternativer Kanal, um Wählergruppen und Unterstützer zu mobilisieren. Das nachfolgende Kapitel nennt die wichtigsten Trends der nächsten Jahre, mitsamt ihren möglichen manipulativen Auswirkungen. Nur wenn wir beobachten, von wem die Zukunftstechniken wie genutzt werden, können wir kommerziellen Auswüchsen vorbeugen.

Date

5. 7.2015 22:02:31

Theme

Internet

0.0013075785 = product of:
  0.015690941 = sum of:
    0.015690941 = weight(_text_:internet in 3297) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.015690941 = score(doc=3297,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.09621047 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.9522398 = idf(docFreq=6276, maxDocs=44218)
          0.032588977 = queryNorm
        0.16308975 = fieldWeight in 3297, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          2.9522398 = idf(docFreq=6276, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3297)
  0.083333336 = coord(1/12)

Abstract

Ontologies have proven to be an essential element in many applications. They are used in agent systems, knowledge management systems, and e-commerce platforms. They can also generate natural language, integrate intelligent information, provide semantic-based access to the Internet, and extract information from texts in addition to being used in many other applications to explicitly declare the knowledge embedded in them. However, not only are ontologies useful for applications in which knowledge plays a key role, but they can also trigger a major change in current Web contents. This change is leading to the third generation of the Web-known as the Semantic Web-which has been defined as "the conceptual structuring of the Web in an explicit machine-readable way."1 This definition does not differ too much from the one used for defining an ontology: "An ontology is an explicit, machinereadable specification of a shared conceptualization."2 In fact, new ontology-based applications and knowledge architectures are developing for this new Web. A common claim for all of these approaches is the need for languages to represent the semantic information that this Web requires-solving the heterogeneous data exchange in this heterogeneous environment. Here, we don't decide which language is best of the Semantic Web. Rather, our goal is to help developers find the most suitable language for their representation needs. The authors analyze the most representative ontology languages created for the Web and compare them using a common framework.

0.0011038391 = product of:
  0.01324607 = sum of:
    0.01324607 = product of:
      0.02649214 = sum of:
        0.02649214 = weight(_text_:22 in 4649) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.02649214 = score(doc=4649,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.11412105 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.032588977 = queryNorm
            0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 4649, 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=4649)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.083333336 = coord(1/12)

Date

26.12.2011 13:40:22

9.19866E-4 = product of:
  0.011038392 = sum of:
    0.011038392 = product of:
      0.022076784 = sum of:
        0.022076784 = weight(_text_:22 in 4553) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.022076784 = score(doc=4553,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.11412105 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.032588977 = queryNorm
            0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 4553, 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=4553)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.083333336 = coord(1/12)

Date

16.11.2018 14:22:01