Search (119 results, page 2 of 6)

0.0276622 = product of:
  0.1106488 = sum of:
    0.1106488 = weight(_text_:standards in 1889) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.1106488 = score(doc=1889,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.22470023 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.4569545 = idf(docFreq=1393, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050415643 = queryNorm
        0.49242854 = fieldWeight in 1889, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          4.4569545 = idf(docFreq=1393, maxDocs=44218)
          0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=1889)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

Was kommt danach? Was kommt nach XML, Google und Webservices? Unter dem Namen Semantic Web sollen sich neue Technologien und Standards durchsetzen, die die Zukunft des Webs bilden, Ziel ist es, Menschen besser mit Computern zusammenarbeiten zu lassen

0.025562897 = product of:
  0.051125795 = sum of:
    0.006866273 = weight(_text_:information in 870) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.006866273 = score(doc=870,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.08850355 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050415643 = queryNorm
        0.0775819 = fieldWeight in 870, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=870)
    0.044259522 = weight(_text_:standards in 870) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.044259522 = score(doc=870,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.22470023 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.4569545 = idf(docFreq=1393, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050415643 = queryNorm
        0.19697142 = fieldWeight in 870, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          4.4569545 = idf(docFreq=1393, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=870)
  0.5 = coord(2/4)

Content

"Wie kann man semantische Informationen übermitteln? Die Antwort auf diese Frage ist - zur großen Verwunderung Vieler - nicht einfach XML. Die Standardsprache XML (mit ihren verschiedenen Add-Ons wie Xlink, Xpath) wird heutzutage vielfach benutzt, um Informationen zu übermitteln (etwa mittels XML/EDI für B2B-Transaktionen). Obwohl sie dabei bereits eine deutliche Erleichterung verschafft im Vergleich zu früheren ideosynkratischen Mechanismen (z.B. EDIFACT), ist XML per se nur bedingt geeignet, um semantische Zusammenhänge auszudrücken. Die Struktur eines XMLDokuments ist nicht gleichzusetzen mit der Semantik der darin enthaltenen Informationsbestandteile. Die Schemasprachen DTD (Document Type Definition) und XML-Schema sind zu schwach, um alle semantischen Zusammenhänge zu transportieren. Zur Lösung des Problems wurde ein Schichtenmodell konzipiert. Es baut auf den existierenden Standards für XML mit den Namespace-Mechanismen und XMLSchemadefinitionen auf, um Informationen auf syntaktischer Ebene zu transportieren. Allerdings wird die Ausdrucksfähigkeit von XML deutlich erweitert. Der Erweiterung liegt der Standard RDF (Ressource Description Framework) zugrunde. Mit diesem Ansatz können komplexe Aussagen über Tripel modelliert werden. "Alexander glaubt, dass Andreas ein Experte im Clustering ist", wird repräsentiert durch "Alexander glaubt X",X ist eine Aussage", "Das Subjekt von X ist Andreas",das Prädikat von X ist Experteln" und "das Objekt von X ist Clustering". Jede Ressource wird durch ein URI (Uniform Ressource Identifier) repräsentiert, z.B. wäre für Andreas www.aifb.unikarlsruhe.de/WBS/aho eine mögliche URI. Mit RDF Schema können darüber hinaus Gattungshierarchien aufgebaut werden, etwa um auszudrücken: "Andreas ist ein Experte" oder - exakter dargestellt - "Das Ding" hinter www.aifb.unikarlsruhe.de/WBS/aho ist ein Experte". Die darauf folgenden Ebenen des Schichtenmodells befassen sich mit einer zunehmend feineren Darstellung von inhaltlichen Beziehungen. Zum Beispiel umfassen semantische Technologien sogenannte "Ontologien", die für ein Fachgebiet nicht nur Kategorisierungen, sondern auch Regeln beschreiben. Mit ontologischen Regelmechanismen lassen sich auch implizite Verknüpfungen erkennen."

Source

Information - Wissenschaft und Praxis. 53(2002) H.5, S.300

0.022726912 = product of:
  0.045453824 = sum of:
    0.010406143 = weight(_text_:information in 3062) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.010406143 = score(doc=3062,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.08850355 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050415643 = queryNorm
        0.11757882 = fieldWeight in 3062, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.02734375 = fieldNorm(doc=3062)
    0.03504768 = product of:
      0.07009536 = sum of:
        0.07009536 = weight(_text_:organization in 3062) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.07009536 = score(doc=3062,freq=16.0), product of:
            0.17974974 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5653565 = idf(docFreq=3399, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050415643 = queryNorm
            0.38996086 = fieldWeight in 3062, product of:
              4.0 = tf(freq=16.0), with freq of:
                16.0 = termFreq=16.0
              3.5653565 = idf(docFreq=3399, maxDocs=44218)
              0.02734375 = fieldNorm(doc=3062)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(2/4)

Abstract

18 August 2009 -- Today W3C announces a new standard that builds a bridge between the world of knowledge organization systems - including thesauri, classifications, subject headings, taxonomies, and folksonomies - and the linked data community, bringing benefits to both. Libraries, museums, newspapers, government portals, enterprises, social networking applications, and other communities that manage large collections of books, historical artifacts, news reports, business glossaries, blog entries, and other items can now use Simple Knowledge Organization System (SKOS) to leverage the power of linked data. As different communities with expertise and established vocabularies use SKOS to integrate them into the Semantic Web, they increase the value of the information for everyone.

Content

SKOS Adapts to the Diversity of Knowledge Organization Systems A useful starting point for understanding the role of SKOS is the set of subject headings published by the US Library of Congress (LOC) for categorizing books, videos, and other library resources. These headings can be used to broaden or narrow queries for discovering resources. For instance, one can narrow a query about books on "Chinese literature" to "Chinese drama," or further still to "Chinese children's plays." Library of Congress subject headings have evolved within a community of practice over a period of decades. By now publishing these subject headings in SKOS, the Library of Congress has made them available to the linked data community, which benefits from a time-tested set of concepts to re-use in their own data. This re-use adds value ("the network effect") to the collection. When people all over the Web re-use the same LOC concept for "Chinese drama," or a concept from some other vocabulary linked to it, this creates many new routes to the discovery of information, and increases the chances that relevant items will be found. As an example of mapping one vocabulary to another, a combined effort from the STITCH, TELplus and MACS Projects provides links between LOC concepts and RAMEAU, a collection of French subject headings used by the Bibliothèque Nationale de France and other institutions. SKOS can be used for subject headings but also many other approaches to organizing knowledge. Because different communities are comfortable with different organization schemes, SKOS is designed to port diverse knowledge organization systems to the Web. "Active participation from the library and information science community in the development of SKOS over the past seven years has been key to ensuring that SKOS meets a variety of needs," said Thomas Baker, co-chair of the Semantic Web Deployment Working Group, which published SKOS. "One goal in creating SKOS was to provide new uses for well-established knowledge organization systems by providing a bridge to the linked data cloud." SKOS is part of the Semantic Web technology stack. Like the Web Ontology Language (OWL), SKOS can be used to define vocabularies. But the two technologies were designed to meet different needs. SKOS is a simple language with just a few features, tuned for sharing and linking knowledge organization systems such as thesauri and classification schemes. OWL offers a general and powerful framework for knowledge representation, where additional "rigor" can afford additional benefits (for instance, business rule processing). To get started with SKOS, see the SKOS Primer.

0.022594623 = product of:
  0.045189247 = sum of:
    0.006068985 = weight(_text_:information in 117) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.006068985 = score(doc=117,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.08850355 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050415643 = queryNorm
        0.068573356 = fieldWeight in 117, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.01953125 = fieldNorm(doc=117)
    0.03912026 = weight(_text_:standards in 117) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.03912026 = score(doc=117,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.22470023 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.4569545 = idf(docFreq=1393, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050415643 = queryNorm
        0.17409979 = fieldWeight in 117, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          4.4569545 = idf(docFreq=1393, maxDocs=44218)
          0.01953125 = fieldNorm(doc=117)
  0.5 = coord(2/4)

Abstract

Semantic Web ist Vision, Konzept und Programm für die nächste Generation des Internets. Semantik ist dabei ein wesentliches Element in der Transformation von Information in Wissen, sei es um eine effizientere Maschine-Maschine-Kommunikation zu ermöglichen oder um Geschäftsprozess-Management, Wissensmanagement und innerbetriebliche Kooperation durch Modellierung zu verbessern. Der Band richtet sich gleichermaßen an ein praxisorientiertes und wissenschaftliches Publikum, das nicht nur aus der technischen Perspektive einen Zugang zum Thema sucht. Der praktische Nutzen wird in der Fülle von Anwendungsbeispielen offensichtlich, in denen semantische Technologien zum Einsatz kommen. Praxisorientierung ist auch das Leitthema der Semantic Web School, die sich zum Ziel gesetzt hat, den Wissenstransfer zu semantischen Technologien anzukurbeln und den interdisziplinären Diskurs über deren Nutzen und Folgen zu intensivieren. Der vorliegende Band vereinigt 33 Beiträge von 57 Autoren aus 35 Institutionen zu einem virulenten und multidisziplinären Thema. Der Band richtet sich gleichermaßen an interessierte Laien und fachfremde Experten, die nicht nur aus der technischen Perspektive einen Zugang zum Thema suchen. Denn obwohl das Thema Semantic Web zu überwiegendem Maße ein technisches ist, sollen hier bewusst jene Aspekte angesprochen werden. die außerhalb einer ingenieurswissenschaftlichen Perspektive von Relevanz sind und vor allem die praktischen Aspekte semantischer Technologien adressieren. Dieser Anforderung wird durch die vielen Praxisbezüge und Anwendungsbeispiele innerhalb der einzelnen Beiträge Rechnung getragen. Hierbei ist es den Herausgebern jedoch wichtig darauf hinzuweisen, das Semantic Web und semantische Technologien nicht als verheißungsvolles Allheilmittel der durch Informationstechnologien heraufbeschworenen Probleme und Herausforderungen zu betrachten. Ganz im Gegenteil plädieren die Herausgeber für eine verstärkte Auseinandersetzung mit dem Thema unter Einbeziehung einer großen Vielfalt an Experten aus den unterschiedlichsten Fachbereichen, die einen reflektierten und kritischen Beitrag zu den positiven und negativen Effekten semantischer Technologien beitragen sollen.

Content

Inhalt: Im ersten Teil wird neben der begrifflichen Klärung eine Reihe von Einstiegspunkten angeboten, ohne dass der Leser das Semantic Web in seiner Systematik und Funktionsweise kennen muss. Im Beitrag von Andreas Blumauer und Tassilo Pellegrini werden die zentralen Begriffe rund um semantische Technologien vorgestellt und zentrale Konzepte überblicksartig dargestellt. Die Arbeitsgruppe um Bernardi et al. leitet über in den Themenbereich der Arbeitsorganisation und diskutieret die Bedingungen für den Einsatz semantischer Technologien aus der Perspektive der Wissensarbeit. Dem Thema Normen und Standards wurden sogar zwei Beiträge gewidmet. Während Christian Galinski die grundsätzliche Notwendigkeit von Normen zu Zwecken der Interoperabilität aus einer Top-DownPerspektive beleuchtet, eröffnet Klaus Birkenbihl einen Einblick in die technischen Standards des Semantic Web aus der Bottom-Up-Perspektive des World Wide Web Consortiums (W3C). Mit einem Beitrag zum Innovationsgrad semantischer Technologien in der ökonomischen Koordination betreten Michael Weber und Karl Fröschl weitgehend theoretisches Neuland und legen ein Fundament für weiterführende Auseinandersetzungen. Abgerundet wird der erste Teil noch mit einem Beitrag von Bernd Wohlkinger und Tassilo Pellegrini über die technologiepolitischen Dimensionen der Semantic Web Forschung in der europäischen Union.
Der dritte Teil des Bandes thematisiert die organisationalen Dimensionen des Semantic Web und demonstriert unter dem Stichwort "Wissensmanagement" eine Reihe von Konzepten und Anwendungen im betrieblichen und kollaborativen Umgang mit Information. Der Beitrag von Andreas Blumauer und Thomas Fundneider bietet einen Überblick über den Einsatz semantischer Technologien am Beispiel eines integrierten Wissensmanagement-Systems. Michael John und Jörg Drescher zeichnen den historischen Entwicklungsprozess des IT-Einsatzes für das Management von Informations- und Wissensprozessen im betrieblichen Kontext. Vor dem Hintergrund der betrieblichen Veränderungen durch Globalisierung und angeheizten Wettbewerb zeigt Heiko Beier, welche Rollen, Prozesse und Instrumente in wissensbasierten Organisationen die effiziente Nutzung von Wissen unterstützen. Mit dem Konzept des kollaborativen Wissensmanagement präsentiert das Autorenteam Schmitz et al. einen innovativen WissensmanagementAnsatz auf Peer-to-Peer-Basis mit dem Ziel der kollaborativen Einbindung und Pflege von dezentralisierten Wissensbasen. York Sure und Christoph Tempich demonstrieren anhand der Modellierungsmethode DILIGENT, welchen Beitrag Ontologien bei der Wissensvernetzung in Organisationen leisten können. Hannes Werthner und Michael Borovicka adressieren die Bedeutung semantischer Technologien für eCommerce und demonstrieren am Beispiel HARMONISE deren Einsatz im Bereich des eTourismus. Erweitert wird diese Perspektive durch den Beitrag von Fill et al., in dem das Zusammenspiel zwischen Web-Services und Geschäftsprozessen aus der Perspektive der Wirtschaftsinformatik analysiert wird. Abschließend präsentiert das Autorenteam Angele et al. eine Reihe von realisierten Anwendungen auf Basis semantischer Technologien und identifiziert kritische Faktoren für deren Einsatz.

0.020170141 = product of:
  0.040340282 = sum of:
    0.01029941 = weight(_text_:information in 1337) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.01029941 = score(doc=1337,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.08850355 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050415643 = queryNorm
        0.116372846 = fieldWeight in 1337, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1337)
    0.030040871 = product of:
      0.060081743 = sum of:
        0.060081743 = weight(_text_:organization in 1337) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.060081743 = score(doc=1337,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.17974974 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5653565 = idf(docFreq=3399, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050415643 = queryNorm
            0.33425218 = fieldWeight in 1337, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              3.5653565 = idf(docFreq=3399, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1337)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(2/4)

Abstract

In this article, we describe the development of an extension to the Simple Knowledge Organization System (SKOS) to accommodate the needs of vocabulary development applications (VDA) managing metadata schemes and requiring close tracking of change to both those schemes and their member concepts. We take a neopragmatic epistemic stance in asserting the need for an entity in SKOS modeling to mediate between the abstract concept and the concrete scheme. While the SKOS model sufficiently describes entities for modeling the current state of a scheme in support of indexing and search on the Semantic Web, it lacks the expressive power to serve the needs of VDA needing to maintain scheme historical continuity. We demonstrate preliminarily that conceptualizations drawn from empirical work in modeling entities in the bibliographic universe, such as works, texts, and exemplars, can provide the basis for SKOS extension in ways that support more rigorous demands of capturing concept evolution in VDA.

Source

Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 59(2008) no.1, S.25-37

0.018446784 = product of:
  0.03689357 = sum of:
    0.019191816 = weight(_text_:information in 246) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.019191816 = score(doc=246,freq=10.0), product of:
        0.08850355 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050415643 = queryNorm
        0.21684799 = fieldWeight in 246, product of:
          3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
            10.0 = termFreq=10.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=246)
    0.017701752 = product of:
      0.035403505 = sum of:
        0.035403505 = weight(_text_:organization in 246) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.035403505 = score(doc=246,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17974974 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5653565 = idf(docFreq=3399, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050415643 = queryNorm
            0.19695997 = fieldWeight in 246, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5653565 = idf(docFreq=3399, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=246)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(2/4)

Abstract

Semantic Web tools provide new and significant opportunities for organizing and improving the utility of biomedical information. As librarians become more involved with biomedical information, it is important for them, particularly catalogers, to be part of research teams that are employing these techniques and developing a high level interoperable biomedical infrastructure. To illustrate these principles, we used Semantic Web tools to create a knowledge model for human visual phenotypes (observable characteristics). This is an important foundation for generating associations between genomics and clinical medicine. In turn this can allow customized medical therapies and provide insights into the molecular basis of disease. The knowledge model incorporates a wide variety of clinical and genomic data including examination findings, demographics, laboratory tests, imaging and variations in DNA sequence. Information organization, storage and retrieval are facilitated through the use of metadata and the ability to make computable statements in the visual science domain. This paper presents our work, discusses the value of Semantic Web technologies in biomedicine, and identifies several important roles that library and information scientists can play in developing a more powerful biomedical information infrastructure.

0.018399216 = product of:
  0.036798432 = sum of:
    0.012015978 = weight(_text_:information in 5471) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.012015978 = score(doc=5471,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.08850355 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050415643 = queryNorm
        0.13576832 = fieldWeight in 5471, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=5471)
    0.024782453 = product of:
      0.049564905 = sum of:
        0.049564905 = weight(_text_:organization in 5471) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.049564905 = score(doc=5471,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17974974 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5653565 = idf(docFreq=3399, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050415643 = queryNorm
            0.27574396 = fieldWeight in 5471, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5653565 = idf(docFreq=3399, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=5471)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(2/4)

Abstract

The paper outlines the first steps in an initiative to weave the Dewey Decimal Classification (DDC) as a resource into the fabric of the Web. In order for DDC web services to not only being »on« the Web, but rather a part of it, Dewey has to be available under the same rules as other information resources. The process of URI design for identified resources is described and a draft URI template is presented. In addition, basic semantic principles of RESTful web service architecture are discussed, and their appropriateness for making a large-scale knowledge organization system (KOS) like the DDC more congenial for Semantic Web applications is evaluated.

0.018399216 = product of:
  0.036798432 = sum of:
    0.012015978 = weight(_text_:information in 239) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.012015978 = score(doc=239,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.08850355 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050415643 = queryNorm
        0.13576832 = fieldWeight in 239, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=239)
    0.024782453 = product of:
      0.049564905 = sum of:
        0.049564905 = weight(_text_:organization in 239) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.049564905 = score(doc=239,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17974974 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5653565 = idf(docFreq=3399, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050415643 = queryNorm
            0.27574396 = fieldWeight in 239, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5653565 = idf(docFreq=3399, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=239)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(2/4)

Abstract

Foucault's The Birth of the Clinic serves as a pattern for understanding the paradigm shifts represented by the Semantic Web. Foucault presents the history ofmedical practice as a 3-stage sequence of transitions: from classificatory techniques to clinical strategies, and then to anatomico-pathological strategies. In this paper, the author removes these three stages both from their medical context and from Foucault's historical sequence, to produce a model for understanding information organization in the context of the Semantic Web. We can extract from Foucault's theory a triadic relationship between three interpretive strategies, all of them defined by their different relationships to a textual body: classification, description and analysis.

0.01796158 = product of:
  0.03592316 = sum of:
    0.012015978 = weight(_text_:information in 1026) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.012015978 = score(doc=1026,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.08850355 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050415643 = queryNorm
        0.13576832 = fieldWeight in 1026, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=1026)
    0.023907183 = product of:
      0.047814365 = sum of:
        0.047814365 = weight(_text_:22 in 1026) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.047814365 = score(doc=1026,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17654699 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050415643 = queryNorm
            0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 1026, 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=1026)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(2/4)

Abstract

We have created software applications that allow users to both author and use Semantic Web metadata. To create and use a layer of semantic content on top of the existing Web, we have (1) implemented a user interface that expedites the task of attributing metadata to resources on the Web, and (2) augmented a Web browser to leverage this semantic metadata to provide relevant information and tasks to the user. This project provides a framework for annotating and reorganizing existing files, pages, and sites on the Web that is similar to Vannevar Bushrsquos original concepts of trail blazing and associative indexing.

Source

Research and advanced technology for digital libraries : 7th European Conference, proceedings / ECDL 2003, Trondheim, Norway, August 17-22, 2003

0.01796158 = product of:
  0.03592316 = sum of:
    0.012015978 = weight(_text_:information in 759) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.012015978 = score(doc=759,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.08850355 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050415643 = queryNorm
        0.13576832 = fieldWeight in 759, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=759)
    0.023907183 = product of:
      0.047814365 = sum of:
        0.047814365 = weight(_text_:22 in 759) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.047814365 = score(doc=759,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17654699 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050415643 = 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)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(2/4)

Abstract

XML will have a profound impact on the way data is exchanged on the Internet. An important feature of this language is the separation of content from presentation, which makes it easier to select and/or reformat the data. However, due to the likelihood of numerous industry and domain specific DTDs, those who wish to integrate information will still be faced with the problem of semantic interoperability. In this paper we discuss why this problem is not solved by XML, and then discuss why the Resource Description Framework is only a partial solution. We then present the SHOE language, which we feel has many of the features necessary to enable a semantic web, and describe an existing set of tools that make it easy to use the language.

Date

11. 5.2013 19:22:18

0.017773904 = product of:
  0.035547808 = sum of:
    0.018023966 = weight(_text_:information in 4409) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.018023966 = score(doc=4409,freq=18.0), product of:
        0.08850355 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050415643 = queryNorm
        0.20365247 = fieldWeight in 4409, product of:
          4.2426405 = tf(freq=18.0), with freq of:
            18.0 = termFreq=18.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.02734375 = fieldNorm(doc=4409)
    0.01752384 = product of:
      0.03504768 = sum of:
        0.03504768 = weight(_text_:organization in 4409) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.03504768 = score(doc=4409,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.17974974 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5653565 = idf(docFreq=3399, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050415643 = queryNorm
            0.19498043 = fieldWeight in 4409, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              3.5653565 = idf(docFreq=3399, maxDocs=44218)
              0.02734375 = fieldNorm(doc=4409)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(2/4)

Abstract

We saw in the introduction how the Semantic Web makes possible a new generation of knowledge management tools. We now turn our attention more specifically to Semantic Web based support for virtual communities of practice. The notion of communities of practice has attracted much attention in the field of knowledge management. Communities of practice are groups within (or sometimes across) organizations who share a common set of information needs or problems. They are typically not a formal organizational unit but an informal network, each sharing in part a common agenda and shared interests or issues. In one example it was found that a lot of knowledge sharing among copier engineers took place through informal exchanges, often around a water cooler. As well as local, geographically based communities, trends towards flexible working and globalisation have led to interest in supporting dispersed communities using Internet technology. The challenge for organizations is to support such communities and make them effective. Provided with an ontology meeting the needs of a particular community of practice, knowledge management tools can arrange knowledge assets into the predefined conceptual classes of the ontology, allowing more natural and intuitive access to knowledge. Knowledge management tools must give users the ability to organize information into a controllable asset. Building an intranet-based store of information is not sufficient for knowledge management; the relationships within the stored information are vital. These relationships cover such diverse issues as relative importance, context, sequence, significance, causality and association. The potential for knowledge management tools is vast; not only can they make better use of the raw information already available, but they can sift, abstract and help to share new information, and present it to users in new and compelling ways.
In this chapter, we describe the OntoShare system which facilitates and encourages the sharing of information between communities of practice within (or perhaps across) organizations and which encourages people - who may not previously have known of each other's existence in a large organization - to make contact where there are mutual concerns or interests. As users contribute information to the community, a knowledge resource annotated with meta-data is created. Ontologies defined using the resource description framework (RDF) and RDF Schema (RDFS) are used in this process. RDF is a W3C recommendation for the formulation of meta-data for WWW resources. RDF(S) extends this standard with the means to specify domain vocabulary and object structures - that is, concepts and the relationships that hold between them. In the next section, we describe in detail the way in which OntoShare can be used to share and retrieve knowledge and how that knowledge is represented in an RDF-based ontology. We then proceed to discuss in Section 10.3 how the ontologies in OntoShare evolve over time based on user interaction with the system and motivate our approach to user-based creation of RDF-annotated information resources. The way in which OntoShare can help to locate expertise within an organization is then described, followed by a discussion of the sociotechnical issues of deploying such a tool. Finally, a planned evaluation exercise and avenues for further research are outlined.

0.017024403 = product of:
  0.034048807 = sum of:
    0.01029941 = weight(_text_:information in 2127) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.01029941 = score(doc=2127,freq=8.0), product of:
        0.08850355 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050415643 = queryNorm
        0.116372846 = fieldWeight in 2127, product of:
          2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
            8.0 = termFreq=8.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0234375 = fieldNorm(doc=2127)
    0.023749396 = product of:
      0.047498792 = sum of:
        0.047498792 = weight(_text_:organization in 2127) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.047498792 = score(doc=2127,freq=10.0), product of:
            0.17974974 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5653565 = idf(docFreq=3399, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050415643 = queryNorm
            0.26424956 = fieldWeight in 2127, product of:
              3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
                10.0 = termFreq=10.0
              3.5653565 = idf(docFreq=3399, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0234375 = fieldNorm(doc=2127)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(2/4)

Content

"When dealing with a large-scale and widely-used knowledge organization system like the Dewey Decimal Classification, we often tend to focus solely on the organization aspect, which is closely intertwined with editorial work. This is perfectly understandable, since developing and updating the DDC, keeping up with current scientific developments, spotting new trends in both scholarly communication and popular publishing, and figuring out how to fit those patterns into the structure of the scheme are as intriguing as they are challenging. From the organization perspective, the intended user of the scheme is mainly the classifier. Dewey acts very much as a number-building engine, providing richly documented concepts to help with classification decisions. Since the Middle Ages, quasi-religious battles have been fought over the "valid" arrangement of places according to specific views of the world, as parodied by Jorge Luis Borges and others. Organizing knowledge has always been primarily an ontological activity; it is about putting the world into the classification. However, there is another side to this coin--the discovery side. While the hierarchical organization of the DDC establishes a default set of places and neighborhoods that is also visible in the physical manifestation of library shelves, this is just one set of relationships in the DDC. A KOS (Knowledge Organization System) becomes powerful by expressing those other relationships in a manner that not only collocates items in a physical place but in a knowledge space, and exposes those other relationships in ways beneficial and congenial to the unique perspective of an information seeker.
What are those "other" relationships that Dewey possesses and that seem so important to surface? Firstly, there is the relationship of concepts to resources. Dewey has been used for a long time, and over 200,000 numbers are assigned to information resources each year and added to WorldCat by the Library of Congress and the German National Library alone. Secondly, we have relationships between concepts in the scheme itself. Dewey provides a rich set of non-hierarchical relations, indicating other relevant and related subjects across disciplinary boundaries. Thirdly, perhaps most importantly, there is the relationship between the same concepts across different languages. Dewey has been translated extensively, and current versions are available in French, German, Hebrew, Italian, Spanish, and Vietnamese. Briefer representations of the top-three levels (the DDC Summaries) are available in several languages in the DeweyBrowser. This multilingual nature of the scheme allows searchers to access a broader range of resources or to switch the language of--and thus localize--subject metadata seamlessly. MelvilClass, a Dewey front-end developed by the German National Library for the German translation, could be used as a common interface to the DDC in any language, as it is built upon the standard DDC data format. It is not hard to give an example of the basic terminology of a class pulled together in a multilingual way: <class/794.8> a skos:Concept ; skos:notation "794.8"^^ddc:notation ; skos:prefLabel "Computer games"@en ; skos:prefLabel "Computerspiele"@de ; skos:prefLabel "Jeux sur ordinateur"@fr ; skos:prefLabel "Juegos por computador"@es .
Expressed in such manner, the Dewey number provides a language-independent representation of a Dewey concept, accompanied by language-dependent assertions about the concept. This information, identified by a URI, can be easily consumed by semantic web agents and used in various metadata scenarios. Fourthly, as we have seen, it is important to play well with others, i.e., establishing and maintaining relationships to other KOS and making the scheme available in different formats. As noted in the Dewey blog post "Tags and Dewey," since no single scheme is ever going to be the be-all, end-all solution for knowledge discovery, DDC concepts have been extensively mapped to other vocabularies and taxonomies, sometimes bridging them and acting as a backbone, sometimes using them as additional access vocabulary to be able to do more work "behind the scenes." To enable other applications and schemes to make use of those relationships, the full Dewey database is available in XML format; RDF-based formats and a web service are forthcoming. Pulling those relationships together under a common surface will be the next challenge going forward. In the semantic web community the concept of Linked Data (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Linked_Data) currently receives some attention, with its emphasis on exposing and connecting data using technologies like URIs, HTTP and RDF to improve information discovery on the web. With its focus on relationships and discovery, it seems that Dewey will be well prepared to become part of this big linked data set. Now it is about putting the classification back into the world!"

0.016597321 = product of:
  0.066389285 = sum of:
    0.066389285 = weight(_text_:standards in 5510) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.066389285 = score(doc=5510,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.22470023 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.4569545 = idf(docFreq=1393, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050415643 = queryNorm
        0.29545712 = fieldWeight in 5510, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          4.4569545 = idf(docFreq=1393, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=5510)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

Explores the opportunities for libraries to contribute to the proposed global "Semantic Web." Library name and subject authority files, including work that IFLA has done related to a new view of "Universal Bibliographic Control" in the Internet environment and the work underway in the U.S. and Europe, are making a reality of the virtual international authority file on the Web. The bibliographic and authority records created according to AACR2 reflect standards for metadata that libraries have provided for years. New opportunities for using these records in the digital world are described (interoperability), including mapping with Dublin Core metadata. AACR2 recently updated Chapter 9 on Electronic Resources. That process and highlights of the changes are described, including Library of Congress' rule interpretations.

0.013850344 = product of:
  0.027700689 = sum of:
    0.017079638 = weight(_text_:information in 4401) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.017079638 = score(doc=4401,freq=22.0), product of:
        0.08850355 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050415643 = queryNorm
        0.19298252 = fieldWeight in 4401, product of:
          4.690416 = tf(freq=22.0), with freq of:
            22.0 = termFreq=22.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0234375 = fieldNorm(doc=4401)
    0.010621051 = product of:
      0.021242103 = sum of:
        0.021242103 = weight(_text_:organization in 4401) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.021242103 = score(doc=4401,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17974974 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5653565 = idf(docFreq=3399, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050415643 = queryNorm
            0.11817598 = fieldWeight in 4401, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5653565 = idf(docFreq=3399, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0234375 = fieldNorm(doc=4401)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(2/4)

Abstract

With the current changes driven by the expansion of the World Wide Web, this book uses a different approach from other books on the market: it applies ontologies to electronically available information to improve the quality of knowledge management in large and distributed organizations. Ontologies are formal theories supporting knowledge sharing and reuse. They can be used to explicitly represent semantics of semi-structured information. These enable sophisticated automatic support for acquiring, maintaining and accessing information. Methodology and tools are developed for intelligent access to large volumes of semi-structured and textual information sources in intra- and extra-, and internet-based environments to employ the full power of ontologies in supporting knowledge management from the information client perspective and the information provider. The aim of the book is to support efficient and effective knowledge management and focuses on weakly-structured online information sources. It is aimed primarily at researchers in the area of knowledge management and information retrieval and will also be a useful reference for students in computer science at the postgraduate level and for business managers who are aiming to increase the corporations' information infrastructure. The Semantic Web is a very important initiative affecting the future of the WWW that is currently generating huge interest. The book covers several highly significant contributions to the semantic web research effort, including a new language for defining ontologies, several novel software tools and a coherent methodology for the application of the tools for business advantage. It also provides 3 case studies which give examples of the real benefits to be derived from the adoption of semantic-web based ontologies in "real world" situations. As such, the book is an excellent mixture of theory, tools and applications in an important area of WWW research. * Provides guidelines for introducing knowledge management concepts and tools into enterprises, to help knowledge providers present their knowledge efficiently and effectively. * Introduces an intelligent search tool that supports users in accessing information and a tool environment for maintenance, conversion and acquisition of information sources. * Discusses three large case studies which will help to develop the technology according to the actual needs of large and or virtual organisations and will provide a testbed for evaluating tools and methods. The book is aimed at people with at least a good understanding of existing WWW technology and some level of technical understanding of the underpinning technologies (XML/RDF). It will be of interest to graduate students, academic and industrial researchers in the field, and the many industrial personnel who are tracking WWW technology developments in order to understand the business implications. It could also be used to support undergraduate courses in the area but is not itself an introductory text.

Content

Inhalt: OIL and DAML + OIL: Ontology Languages for the Semantic Web (pages 11-31) / Dieter Fensel, Frank van Harmelen and Ian Horrocks A Methodology for Ontology-Based Knowledge Management (pages 33-46) / York Sure and Rudi Studer Ontology Management: Storing, Aligning and Maintaining Ontologies (pages 47-69) / Michel Klein, Ying Ding, Dieter Fensel and Borys Omelayenko Sesame: A Generic Architecture for Storing and Querying RDF and RDF Schema (pages 71-89) / Jeen Broekstra, Arjohn Kampman and Frank van Harmelen Generating Ontologies for the Semantic Web: OntoBuilder (pages 91-115) / R. H. P. Engels and T. Ch. Lech OntoEdit: Collaborative Engineering of Ontologies (pages 117-132) / York Sure, Michael Erdmann and Rudi Studer QuizRDF: Search Technology for the Semantic Web (pages 133-144) / John Davies, Richard Weeks and Uwe Krohn Spectacle (pages 145-159) / Christiaan Fluit, Herko ter Horst, Jos van der Meer, Marta Sabou and Peter Mika OntoShare: Evolving Ontologies in a Knowledge Sharing System (pages 161-177) / John Davies, Alistair Duke and Audrius Stonkus Ontology Middleware and Reasoning (pages 179-196) / Atanas Kiryakov, Kiril Simov and Damyan Ognyanov Ontology-Based Knowledge Management at Work: The Swiss Life Case Studies (pages 197-218) / Ulrich Reimer, Peter Brockhausen, Thorsten Lau and Jacqueline R. Reich Field Experimenting with Semantic Web Tools in a Virtual Organization (pages 219-244) / Victor Iosif, Peter Mika, Rikard Larsson and Hans Akkermans A Future Perspective: Exploiting Peer-To-Peer and the Semantic Web for Knowledge Management (pages 245-264) / Dieter Fensel, Steffen Staab, Rudi Studer, Frank van Harmelen and John Davies Conclusions: Ontology-driven Knowledge Management - Towards the Semantic Web? (pages 265-266) / John Davies, Dieter Fensel and Frank van Harmelen

0.013446759 = product of:
  0.026893519 = sum of:
    0.006866273 = weight(_text_:information in 3883) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.006866273 = score(doc=3883,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.08850355 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050415643 = queryNorm
        0.0775819 = fieldWeight in 3883, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=3883)
    0.020027246 = product of:
      0.040054493 = sum of:
        0.040054493 = weight(_text_:organization in 3883) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.040054493 = score(doc=3883,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.17974974 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5653565 = idf(docFreq=3399, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050415643 = queryNorm
            0.22283478 = fieldWeight in 3883, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              3.5653565 = idf(docFreq=3399, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=3883)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(2/4)

Abstract

At VVWW-7 (Brisbane, 1997), Tim Berners-Lee outlined his vision of a global reasoning web. At VVWW- 8 (Toronto, May 1998), he developed this into a vision of a semantic web, where one Gould search not just for isolated words, but for meaning in the form of logically provable claims. In the past four years this vision has spread with amazing speed. The semantic web has been adopted by the European Commission as one of the important goals of the Sixth Framework Programme. In the United States it has become linked with the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA). While this quest to achieve a semantic web is new, the quest for meaning in language has a history that is almost as old as language itself. Accordingly this paper opens with a survey of the historical background. The contributions of the Dublin Core are reviewed briefly. To achieve a semantic web requires both syntactic and semantic interoperability. These challenges are outlined. A basic contention of this paper is that semantic interoperability requires much more than a simple agreement concerning the static meaning of a term. Different levels of agreement (local, regional, national and international) are involved and these levels have their own history. Hence, one of the larger challenges is to create new systems of knowledge organization, which identify and connect these different levels. With respect to meaning or semantics, early twentieth century pioneers such as Wüster were hopeful that it might be sufficient to limit oneself to isolated terms and words without reference to the larger grammatical context: to concept systems rather than to propositional logic. While a fascination with concept systems implicitly dominates many contemporary discussions, this paper suggests why this approach is not sufficient. The final section of this paper explores how an approach using propositional logic could lead to a new approach to universals and particulars. This points to a re-organization of knowledge, and opens the way for a vision of a semantic web with all the historical and cultural richness and complexity of language itself.

Source

New review of information networking. 7(2001) no.xx, S.xx-xx

0.01277699 = product of:
  0.02555398 = sum of:
    0.011892734 = weight(_text_:information in 320) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.011892734 = score(doc=320,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.08850355 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050415643 = queryNorm
        0.1343758 = fieldWeight in 320, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=320)
    0.013661247 = product of:
      0.027322493 = sum of:
        0.027322493 = weight(_text_:22 in 320) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.027322493 = score(doc=320,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17654699 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050415643 = queryNorm
            0.15476047 = fieldWeight in 320, 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=320)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(2/4)

Abstract

"The Semantic Web is an extension of the current Web in which information is given well defined meaning, better enabling computers and people to work in cooperation." - Tim Berners Lee, "Scientific American", May 2001. This authoritative guide shows how the "Semantic Web" works technically and how businesses can utilize it to gain a competitive advantage. It explains what taxonomies and ontologies are as well as their importance in constructing the Semantic Web. The companion web site includes further updates as the framework develops and links to related sites.

BK

85.20 Betriebliche Information und Kommunikation

Classification

85.20 Betriebliche Information und Kommunikation

Date

22. 5.2007 10:37:38

0.011685811 = product of:
  0.023371622 = sum of:
    0.009710376 = weight(_text_:information in 2661) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.009710376 = score(doc=2661,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.08850355 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050415643 = queryNorm
        0.10971737 = fieldWeight in 2661, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=2661)
    0.013661247 = product of:
      0.027322493 = sum of:
        0.027322493 = weight(_text_:22 in 2661) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.027322493 = score(doc=2661,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17654699 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050415643 = queryNorm
            0.15476047 = fieldWeight in 2661, 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=2661)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(2/4)

Abstract

The basic goal of education within a discipline is to transform a novice into an expert. This entails moving the novice toward the "semantic space" that the expert inhabits-the space of concepts, meanings, vocabularies, and other intellectual constructs that comprise the discipline. Metadata is significant to this goal in digitally mediated education environments. Encoding the experts' semantic space not only enables the sharing of semantics among discipline scientists, but also creates an environment that bridges the semantic gap between the common vocabulary of the novice and the granular descriptive language of the seasoned scientist (Greenberg, et al, 2005). Developments underlying the Semantic Web, where vocabularies are formalized in the Web Ontology Language (OWL), and Web 2.0 approaches of user-generated folksonomies provide an infrastructure for linking vocabulary systems and promoting group learning via metadata literacy. Group learning is a pedagogical approach to teaching that harnesses the phenomenon of "collective intelligence" to increase learning by means of collaboration. Learning a new semantic system can be daunting for a novice, and yet it is integral to advance one's knowledge in a discipline and retain interest. These ideas are key to the "BOT 2.0: Botany through Web 2.0, the Memex and Social Learning" project (Bot 2.0).72 Bot 2.0 is a collaboration involving the North Carolina Botanical Garden, the UNC SILS Metadata Research center, and the Renaissance Computing Institute (RENCI). Bot 2.0 presents a curriculum utilizing a memex as a way for students to link and share digital information, working asynchronously in an environment beyond the traditional classroom. Our conception of a memex is not a centralized black box but rather a flexible, distributed framework that uses the most salient and easiest-to-use collaborative platforms (e.g., Facebook, Flickr, wiki and blog technology) for personal information management. By meeting students "where they live" digitally, we hope to attract students to the study of botanical science. A key aspect is to teach students scientific terminology and about the value of metadata, an inherent function in several of the technologies and in the instructional approach we are utilizing. This poster will report on a study examining the value of both folksonomies and taxonomies for post-secondary college students learning plant identification. Our data is drawn from a curriculum involving a virtual independent learning portion and a "BotCamp" weekend at UNC, where students work with digital plan specimens that they have captured. Results provide some insight into the importance of collaboration and shared vocabulary for gaining confidence and for student progression from novice to expert in botany.

Source

Metadata for semantic and social applications : proceedings of the International Conference on Dublin Core and Metadata Applications, Berlin, 22 - 26 September 2008, DC 2008: Berlin, Germany / ed. by Jane Greenberg and Wolfgang Klas

0.010225086 = product of:
  0.020450171 = sum of:
    0.00849658 = weight(_text_:information in 2665) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.00849658 = score(doc=2665,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.08850355 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050415643 = queryNorm
        0.0960027 = fieldWeight in 2665, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.02734375 = fieldNorm(doc=2665)
    0.011953591 = product of:
      0.023907183 = sum of:
        0.023907183 = weight(_text_:22 in 2665) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.023907183 = score(doc=2665,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17654699 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050415643 = queryNorm
            0.1354154 = fieldWeight in 2665, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.02734375 = fieldNorm(doc=2665)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(2/4)

Abstract

Platforms for social computing connect users via shared references to people with whom they have relationships, events attended, places lived in or traveled to, and topics such as favorite books or movies. Since free text is insufficient for expressing such references precisely and unambiguously, many social computing platforms coin identifiers for topics, places, events, and people and provide interfaces for finding and selecting these identifiers from controlled lists. Using these interfaces, users collaboratively construct a web of links among entities. This model needn't be limited to social networking sites. Understanding an item in a digital library or museum requires context: information about the topics, places, events, and people to which the item is related. Students, journalists and investigators traditionally discover this kind of context by asking "the four Ws": what, where, when and who. The DCMI Kernel Metadata Community has recognized the four Ws as fundamental elements of descriptions (Kunze & Turner, 2007). Making better use of metadata to answer these questions via links to appropriate contextual resources has been our focus in a series of research projects over the past few years. Currently we are building a system for enabling readers of any text to relate any topic, place, event or person mentioned in the text to the best explanatory resources available. This system is being developed with two different corpora: a diverse variety of biographical texts characterized by very rich and dense mentions of people, events, places and activities, and a large collection of newly-scanned books, journals and manuscripts relating to Irish culture and history. Like a social computing platform, our system consists of tools for referring to topics, places, events or people, disambiguating these references by linking them to unique identifiers, and using the disambiguated references to provide useful information in context and to link to related resources. Yet current social computing platforms, while usually amenable to importing and exporting data, tend to mint proprietary identifiers and expect links to be traversed using their own interfaces. We take a different approach, using identifiers from both established and emerging naming authorities, representing relationships using standardized metadata vocabularies, and publishing those representations using standard protocols so that links can be stored and traversed anywhere. Central to our strategy is to move from appearances in a text to naming authorities to the the construction of links for searching or querying trusted resources. Using identifiers from naming authorities, rather than literal values (as in the DCMI Kernel) or keys from a proprietary database, makes it more likely that links constructed using our system will continue to be useful in the future. WorldCat Identities URIs (http://worldcat.org/identities/) linked to Library of Congress and Deutsche Nationalbibliothek authority files for persons and organizations and Geonames (http://geonames.org/) URIs for places are stable identifiers attached to a wealth of useful metadata. Yet no naming authority can be totally comprehensive, so our system can be extended to use new sources of identifiers as needed. For example, we are experimenting with using Freebase (http://freebase.com/) URIs to identify historical events, for which no established naming authority currently exists. Stable identifiers (URIs), standardized hyperlinked data formats (XML), and uniform publishing protocols (HTTP) are key ingredients of the web's open architecture. Our system provides an example of how this open architecture can be exploited to build flexible and useful tools for connecting resources via shared references to topics, places, events, and people.

Source

Metadata for semantic and social applications : proceedings of the International Conference on Dublin Core and Metadata Applications, Berlin, 22 - 26 September 2008, DC 2008: Berlin, Germany / ed. by Jane Greenberg and Wolfgang Klas

0.009198101 = product of:
  0.036792405 = sum of:
    0.036792405 = product of:
      0.07358481 = sum of:
        0.07358481 = weight(_text_:organization in 1285) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.07358481 = score(doc=1285,freq=6.0), product of:
            0.17974974 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5653565 = idf(docFreq=3399, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050415643 = queryNorm
            0.40937364 = fieldWeight in 1285, product of:
              2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
                6.0 = termFreq=6.0
              3.5653565 = idf(docFreq=3399, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1285)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

This work-in-progress communication contains the papers and materials presented by Winfried Schmitz-Esser and Alexander Sigel in the joint workshop (with Roberto Poli) "Introducing Terminology-based Ontologies" at the 9th International Conference of the International Society for Knowledge Organization (ISKO), Vienna, Austria, July 6th, 2006.

Content

Inhalt: 1. From traditional Knowledge Organization Systems (authority files, classifications, thesauri) towards ontologies on the web (Alexander Sigel) (Tutorial. Paper with Slides interspersed) pp. 3-53 2. Introduction to Integrative Cross-Language Ontology (ICLO): Formalizing and interrelating textual knowledge to enable intelligent action and knowledge sharing (Winfried Schmitz-Esser) pp. 54-113 3. First Idea Sketch on Modelling ICLO with Topic Maps (Alexander Sigel) (Work in progress paper. Topic maps available from the author) pp. 114-130

0.007510218 = product of:
  0.030040871 = sum of:
    0.030040871 = product of:
      0.060081743 = sum of:
        0.060081743 = weight(_text_:organization in 4412) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.060081743 = score(doc=4412,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.17974974 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5653565 = idf(docFreq=3399, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050415643 = queryNorm
            0.33425218 = fieldWeight in 4412, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              3.5653565 = idf(docFreq=3399, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4412)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

How do we test Semantic Web tools? How can we know that they perform better than current technologies for knowledge management? What does 'better' precisely mean? How can we operationalize and measure this? Some of these questions may be partially answered by simulations in lab experiments that for example look at the speed or scalability of algorithms. However, it is not clear in advance to what extent such laboratory results carry over to the real world. Quality is in the eye of the beholder, and so the quality of Semantic Web methods will very much depend on the perception of their usefulness as seen by tool users. This can only be tested by carefully designed field experiments. In this chapter, we discuss the design considerations and set-up of field experiments with Semantic Web tools, and illustrate these with case examples from a virtual organization in industrial research.