Search (175 results, page 1 of 9)

  • × theme_ss:"Semantische Interoperabilität"
  • × type_ss:"a"
  1. Vetere, G.; Lenzerini, M.: Models for semantic interoperability in service-oriented architectures (2005) 0.18 
    0.17974035 = product of:
  0.29956725 = sum of:
    0.04644411 = product of:
      0.23222055 = sum of:
        0.23222055 = weight(_text_:3a in 306) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.23222055 = score(doc=306,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.35416332 = queryWeight, product of:
              8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04177434 = queryNorm
            0.65568775 = fieldWeight in 306, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=306)
      0.2 = coord(1/5)
    0.23222055 = weight(_text_:2f in 306) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.23222055 = score(doc=306,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.35416332 = queryWeight, product of:
          8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04177434 = queryNorm
        0.65568775 = fieldWeight in 306, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=306)
    0.020902606 = weight(_text_:of in 306) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.020902606 = score(doc=306,freq=14.0), product of:
        0.06532493 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04177434 = queryNorm
        0.31997898 = fieldWeight in 306, product of:
          3.7416575 = tf(freq=14.0), with freq of:
            14.0 = termFreq=14.0
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=306)
  0.6 = coord(3/5)
    Abstract
    Although service-oriented architectures go a long way toward providing interoperability in distributed, heterogeneous environments, managing semantic differences in such environments remains a challenge. We give an overview of the issue of semantic interoperability (integration), provide a semantic characterization of services, and discuss the role of ontologies. Then we analyze four basic models of semantic interoperability that differ in respect to their mapping between service descriptions and ontologies and in respect to where the evaluation of the integration logic is performed. We also provide some guidelines for selecting one of the possible interoperability models.
    Content
    Vgl.: http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/xpl/login.jsp?tp=&arnumber=5386707&url=http%3A%2F%2Fieeexplore.ieee.org%2Fxpls%2Fabs_all.jsp%3Farnumber%3D5386707.
  2. Kim, J.-M.; Shin, H.; Kim, H.-J.: Schema and constraints-based matching and merging of Topic Maps (2007) 0.06 
    0.06261691 = product of:
  0.15654226 = sum of:
    0.14058095 = weight(_text_:philosophy in 922) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.14058095 = score(doc=922,freq=8.0), product of:
        0.23055021 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.5189433 = idf(docFreq=481, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04177434 = queryNorm
        0.60976285 = fieldWeight in 922, product of:
          2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
            8.0 = termFreq=8.0
          5.5189433 = idf(docFreq=481, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=922)
    0.015961302 = weight(_text_:of in 922) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.015961302 = score(doc=922,freq=16.0), product of:
        0.06532493 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04177434 = queryNorm
        0.24433708 = fieldWeight in 922, product of:
          4.0 = tf(freq=16.0), with freq of:
            16.0 = termFreq=16.0
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=922)
  0.4 = coord(2/5)
    Abstract
    In this paper, we propose a multi-strategic matching and merging approach to find correspondences between ontologies based on the syntactic or semantic characteristics and constraints of the Topic Maps. Our multi-strategic matching approach consists of a linguistic module and a Topic Map constraints-based module. A linguistic module computes similarities between concepts using morphological analysis, string normalization and tokenization and language-dependent heuristics. A Topic Map constraints-based module takes advantage of several Topic Maps-dependent techniques such as a topic property-based matching, a hierarchy-based matching, and an association-based matching. This is a composite matching procedure and need not generate a cross-pair of all topics from the ontologies because unmatched pairs of topics can be removed by characteristics and constraints of the Topic Maps. Merging between Topic Maps follows the matching operations. We set up the MERGE function to integrate two Topic Maps into a new Topic Map, which satisfies such merge requirements as entity preservation, property preservation, relation preservation, and conflict resolution. For our experiments, we used oriental philosophy ontologies, western philosophy ontologies, Yahoo western philosophy dictionary, and Wikipedia philosophy ontology as input ontologies. Our experiments show that the automatically generated matching results conform to the outputs generated manually by domain experts and can be of great benefit to the following merging operations.
  3. Heflin, J.; Hendler, J.: Semantic interoperability on the Web (2000) 0.03 
    0.03337468 = product of:
  0.055624463 = sum of:
    0.01646295 = product of:
      0.08231475 = sum of:
        0.08231475 = weight(_text_:problem in 759) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.08231475 = score(doc=759,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.17731056 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.244485 = idf(docFreq=1723, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04177434 = queryNorm
            0.46424055 = fieldWeight in 759, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              4.244485 = idf(docFreq=1723, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=759)
      0.2 = coord(1/5)
    0.01935205 = weight(_text_:of in 759) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.01935205 = score(doc=759,freq=12.0), product of:
        0.06532493 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04177434 = queryNorm
        0.29624295 = fieldWeight in 759, product of:
          3.4641016 = tf(freq=12.0), with freq of:
            12.0 = termFreq=12.0
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=759)
    0.019809462 = product of:
      0.039618924 = sum of:
        0.039618924 = weight(_text_:22 in 759) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.039618924 = score(doc=759,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.14628662 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04177434 = 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)
  0.6 = coord(3/5)
    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
  4. Garcia Marco, F.J.: Compatibility & heterogeneity in knowledge organization : some reflections around a case study in the field of consumer information (2008) 0.03 
    0.025207913 = product of:
  0.042013187 = sum of:
    0.008315044 = product of:
      0.041575223 = sum of:
        0.041575223 = weight(_text_:problem in 1678) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.041575223 = score(doc=1678,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17731056 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.244485 = idf(docFreq=1723, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04177434 = queryNorm
            0.23447686 = fieldWeight in 1678, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              4.244485 = idf(docFreq=1723, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1678)
      0.2 = coord(1/5)
    0.019548526 = weight(_text_:of in 1678) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.019548526 = score(doc=1678,freq=24.0), product of:
        0.06532493 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04177434 = queryNorm
        0.2992506 = fieldWeight in 1678, product of:
          4.8989797 = tf(freq=24.0), with freq of:
            24.0 = termFreq=24.0
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1678)
    0.0141496165 = product of:
      0.028299233 = sum of:
        0.028299233 = weight(_text_:22 in 1678) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.028299233 = score(doc=1678,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.14628662 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04177434 = queryNorm
            0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 1678, 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=1678)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.6 = coord(3/5)
    Abstract
    A case study in compatibility and heterogeneity of knowledge organization (KO) systems and processes is presented. It is based in the experience of the author in the field of information for consumer protection, a good example of the emerging transdisciplinary applied social sciences. The activities and knowledge organization problems and solutions of the Aragonian Consumers' Information and Documentation Centre are described and analyzed. Six assertions can be concluded: a) heterogeneity and compatibility are certainly an inherent problem in knowledge organization and also in practical domains; b) knowledge organization is also a social task, not only a lögical one; c) knowledge organization is affected by economical and efficiency considerations; d) knowledge organization is at the heart of Knowledge Management; e) identifying and maintaining the focus in interdisciplinary fields is a must; f the different knowledge organization tools of a institution must be considered as an integrated system, pursuing a unifying model.
    Date
    16. 3.2008 18:22:50
    Source
    Kompatibilität, Medien und Ethik in der Wissensorganisation - Compatibility, Media and Ethics in Knowledge Organization: Proceedings der 10. Tagung der Deutschen Sektion der Internationalen Gesellschaft für Wissensorganisation Wien, 3.-5. Juli 2006 - Proceedings of the 10th Conference of the German Section of the International Society of Knowledge Organization Vienna, 3-5 July 2006. Ed.: H.P. Ohly, S. Netscher u. K. Mitgutsch
  5. Huckstorf, A.; Petras, V.: Mind the lexical gap : EuroVoc Building Block of the Semantic Web (2011) 0.02 
    0.024285322 = product of:
  0.060713302 = sum of:
    0.0067718076 = weight(_text_:of in 2782) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0067718076 = score(doc=2782,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.06532493 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04177434 = queryNorm
        0.103663445 = fieldWeight in 2782, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2782)
    0.053941496 = product of:
      0.10788299 = sum of:
        0.10788299 = weight(_text_:mind in 2782) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.10788299 = score(doc=2782,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.2607373 = queryWeight, product of:
              6.241566 = idf(docFreq=233, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04177434 = queryNorm
            0.41376126 = fieldWeight in 2782, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              6.241566 = idf(docFreq=233, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2782)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.4 = coord(2/5)
  6. Mitchell, J.S.; Zeng, M.L.; Zumer, M.: Modeling classification systems in multicultural and multilingual contexts (2012) 0.02 
    0.017266503 = product of:
  0.043166257 = sum of:
    0.019153563 = weight(_text_:of in 1967) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.019153563 = score(doc=1967,freq=16.0), product of:
        0.06532493 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04177434 = queryNorm
        0.2932045 = fieldWeight in 1967, product of:
          4.0 = tf(freq=16.0), with freq of:
            16.0 = termFreq=16.0
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1967)
    0.024012696 = product of:
      0.048025392 = sum of:
        0.048025392 = weight(_text_:22 in 1967) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.048025392 = score(doc=1967,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.14628662 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04177434 = queryNorm
            0.32829654 = fieldWeight in 1967, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1967)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.4 = coord(2/5)
    Abstract
    This paper reports on the second part of an initiative of the authors on researching classification systems with the conceptual model defined by the Functional Requirements for Subject Authority Data (FRSAD) final report. In an earlier study, the authors explored whether the FRSAD conceptual model could be extended beyond subject authority data to model classification data. The focus of the current study is to determine if classification data modeled using FRSAD can be used to solve real-world discovery problems in multicultural and multilingual contexts. The paper discusses the relationships between entities (same type or different types) in the context of classification systems that involve multiple translations and /or multicultural implementations. Results of two case studies are presented in detail: (a) two instances of the DDC (DDC 22 in English, and the Swedish-English mixed translation of DDC 22), and (b) Chinese Library Classification. The use cases of conceptual models in practice are also discussed.
  7. Boteram, F.; Hubrich, J.: Specifying intersystem relations : requirements, strategies, and issues (2010) 0.02 
    0.015357548 = product of:
  0.03839387 = sum of:
    0.021414334 = weight(_text_:of in 3691) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.021414334 = score(doc=3691,freq=20.0), product of:
        0.06532493 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04177434 = queryNorm
        0.32781258 = fieldWeight in 3691, product of:
          4.472136 = tf(freq=20.0), with freq of:
            20.0 = termFreq=20.0
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=3691)
    0.016979538 = product of:
      0.033959076 = sum of:
        0.033959076 = weight(_text_:22 in 3691) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.033959076 = score(doc=3691,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.14628662 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04177434 = queryNorm
            0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 3691, 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=3691)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.4 = coord(2/5)
    Abstract
    Ideally, intersystem relations complement highly expressive and thoroughly structured relational indexing languages. The relational structures of the participating systems contribute to the meaning of the individual terms or classes. When conceptualizing mapping relations the structural and functional design of the respective systems must be fully taken into account. As intersystem relations may differ considerably from familiar interconcept relations, the creation of an adequate inventory that is general in coverage and specific in depth demands a deep understanding of the requirements and properties of mapping relations. The characteristics of specific mapping relations largely rely on the characteristics of the systems they are intended to connect. The detailed declaration of differences and peculiarities of specific mapping relations is an important prerequisite for modelling these relations. First approaches towards specifying
    Date
    22. 7.2010 17:11:51
  8. Golub, K.; Tudhope, D.; Zeng, M.L.; Zumer, M.: Terminology registries for knowledge organization systems : functionality, use, and attributes (2014) 0.02 
    0.015357548 = product of:
  0.03839387 = sum of:
    0.021414334 = weight(_text_:of in 1347) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.021414334 = score(doc=1347,freq=20.0), product of:
        0.06532493 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04177434 = queryNorm
        0.32781258 = fieldWeight in 1347, product of:
          4.472136 = tf(freq=20.0), with freq of:
            20.0 = termFreq=20.0
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1347)
    0.016979538 = product of:
      0.033959076 = sum of:
        0.033959076 = weight(_text_:22 in 1347) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.033959076 = score(doc=1347,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.14628662 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04177434 = queryNorm
            0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 1347, 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=1347)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.4 = coord(2/5)
    Abstract
    Terminology registries (TRs) are a crucial element of the infrastructure required for resource discovery services, digital libraries, Linked Data, and semantic interoperability generally. They can make the content of knowledge organization systems (KOS) available both for human and machine access. The paper describes the attributes and functionality for a TR, based on a review of published literature, existing TRs, and a survey of experts. A domain model based on user tasks is constructed and a set of core metadata elements for use in TRs is proposed. Ideally, the TR should allow searching as well as browsing for a KOS, matching a user's search while also providing information about existing terminology services, accessible to both humans and machines. The issues surrounding metadata for KOS are also discussed, together with the rationale for different aspects and the importance of a core set of KOS metadata for future machine-based access; a possible core set of metadata elements is proposed. This is dealt with in terms of practical experience and in relation to the Dublin Core Application Profile.
    Date
    22. 8.2014 17:12:54
    Source
    Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology. 65(2014) no.9, S.1901-1916
  9. Wake, S.; Nicholson, D.: HILT: High-Level Thesaurus Project : building consensus for interoperable subject access across communities (2001) 0.01 
    0.014739186 = product of:
  0.036847964 = sum of:
    0.019956108 = product of:
      0.09978054 = sum of:
        0.09978054 = weight(_text_:problem in 1224) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.09978054 = score(doc=1224,freq=18.0), product of:
            0.17731056 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.244485 = idf(docFreq=1723, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04177434 = queryNorm
            0.5627445 = fieldWeight in 1224, product of:
              4.2426405 = tf(freq=18.0), with freq of:
                18.0 = termFreq=18.0
              4.244485 = idf(docFreq=1723, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=1224)
      0.2 = coord(1/5)
    0.016891856 = weight(_text_:of in 1224) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.016891856 = score(doc=1224,freq=28.0), product of:
        0.06532493 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04177434 = queryNorm
        0.25858206 = fieldWeight in 1224, product of:
          5.2915025 = tf(freq=28.0), with freq of:
            28.0 = termFreq=28.0
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=1224)
  0.4 = coord(2/5)
    Abstract
    This article provides an overview of the work carried out by the HILT Project <http://hilt.cdlr.strath.ac.uk> in making recommendations towards interoperable subject access, or cross-searching and browsing distributed services amongst the archives, libraries, museums and electronic services sectors. The article details consensus achieved at the 19 June 2001 HILT Workshop and discusses the HILT Stakeholder Survey. In 1999 Péter Jascó wrote that "savvy searchers" are asking for direction. Three years later the scenario he describes, that of searchers cross-searching databases where the subject vocabulary used in each case is different, still rings true. Jascó states that, in many cases, databases do not offer the necessary aids required to use the "preferred terms of the subject-controlled vocabulary". The databases to which Jascó refers are Dialog and DataStar. However, the situation he describes applies as well to the area that HILT is researching: that of cross-searching and browsing by subject across databases and catalogues in archives, libraries, museums and online information services. So how does a user access information on a particular subject when it is indexed across a multitude of services under different, but quite often similar, subject terms? Also, if experienced searchers are having problems, what about novice searchers? As information professionals, it is our role to investigate such problems and recommend solutions. Although there is no hard empirical evidence one way or another, HILT participants agree that the problem for users attempting to search across databases is real. There is a strong likelihood that users are disadvantaged by the use of different subject terminology combined with a multitude of different practices taking place within the archive, library, museums and online communities. Arguably, failure to address this problem of interoperability undermines the value of cross-searching and browsing facilities, and wastes public money because relevant resources are 'hidden' from searchers. HILT is charged with analysing this broad problem through qualitative methods, with the main aim of presenting a set of recommendations on how to make it easier to cross-search and browse distributed services. Because this is a very large problem composed of many strands, HILT recognizes that any proposed solutions must address a host of issues. Recommended solutions must be affordable, sustainable, politically acceptable, useful, future-proof and international in scope. It also became clear to the HILT team that progress toward finding solutions to the interoperability problem could only be achieved through direct dialogue with other parties keen to solve this problem, and that the problem was as much about consensus building as it was about finding a solution. This article describes how HILT approached the cross-searching problem; how it investigated the nature of the problem, detailing results from the HILT Stakeholder Survey; and how it achieved consensus through the recent HILT Workshop.
  10. Doerr, M.: Semantic problems of thesaurus mapping (2001) 0.01 
    0.0145429075 = product of:
  0.03635727 = sum of:
    0.0117592495 = product of:
      0.058796246 = sum of:
        0.058796246 = weight(_text_:problem in 5902) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.058796246 = score(doc=5902,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.17731056 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.244485 = idf(docFreq=1723, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04177434 = queryNorm
            0.33160037 = fieldWeight in 5902, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              4.244485 = idf(docFreq=1723, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=5902)
      0.2 = coord(1/5)
    0.024598021 = weight(_text_:of in 5902) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.024598021 = score(doc=5902,freq=38.0), product of:
        0.06532493 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04177434 = queryNorm
        0.37654874 = fieldWeight in 5902, product of:
          6.164414 = tf(freq=38.0), with freq of:
            38.0 = termFreq=38.0
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=5902)
  0.4 = coord(2/5)
    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
    Source
    Journal of digital information. 1(2001) no.8,
  11. Mitchell, J.S.; Zeng, M.L.; Zumer, M.: Modeling classification systems in multicultural and multilingual contexts (2014) 0.01 
    0.014388752 = product of:
  0.03597188 = sum of:
    0.015961302 = weight(_text_:of in 1962) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.015961302 = score(doc=1962,freq=16.0), product of:
        0.06532493 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04177434 = queryNorm
        0.24433708 = fieldWeight in 1962, product of:
          4.0 = tf(freq=16.0), with freq of:
            16.0 = termFreq=16.0
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1962)
    0.02001058 = product of:
      0.04002116 = sum of:
        0.04002116 = weight(_text_:22 in 1962) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.04002116 = score(doc=1962,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.14628662 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04177434 = queryNorm
            0.27358043 = fieldWeight in 1962, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1962)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.4 = coord(2/5)
    Abstract
    This article reports on the second part of an initiative of the authors on researching classification systems with the conceptual model defined by the Functional Requirements for Subject Authority Data (FRSAD) final report. In an earlier study, the authors explored whether the FRSAD conceptual model could be extended beyond subject authority data to model classification data. The focus of the current study is to determine if classification data modeled using FRSAD can be used to solve real-world discovery problems in multicultural and multilingual contexts. The article discusses the relationships between entities (same type or different types) in the context of classification systems that involve multiple translations and/or multicultural implementations. Results of two case studies are presented in detail: (a) two instances of the Dewey Decimal Classification [DDC] (DDC 22 in English, and the Swedish-English mixed translation of DDC 22), and (b) Chinese Library Classification. The use cases of conceptual models in practice are also discussed.
  12. Krause, J.: Shell Model, Semantic Web and Web Information Retrieval (2006) 0.01 
    0.014280482 = product of:
  0.035701204 = sum of:
    0.0117592495 = product of:
      0.058796246 = sum of:
        0.058796246 = weight(_text_:problem in 6061) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.058796246 = score(doc=6061,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.17731056 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.244485 = idf(docFreq=1723, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04177434 = queryNorm
            0.33160037 = fieldWeight in 6061, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              4.244485 = idf(docFreq=1723, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=6061)
      0.2 = coord(1/5)
    0.023941955 = weight(_text_:of in 6061) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.023941955 = score(doc=6061,freq=36.0), product of:
        0.06532493 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04177434 = queryNorm
        0.36650562 = fieldWeight in 6061, product of:
          6.0 = tf(freq=36.0), with freq of:
            36.0 = termFreq=36.0
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=6061)
  0.4 = coord(2/5)
    Abstract
    The middle of the 1990s are coined by the increased enthusiasm for the possibilities of the WWW, which has only recently deviated - at least in relation to scientific information - for the differentiated measuring of its advantages and disadvantages. Web Information Retrieval originated as a specialized discipline with great commercial significance (for an overview see Lewandowski 2005). Besides the new technological structure that enables the indexing and searching (in seconds) of unimaginable amounts of data worldwide, new assessment processes for the ranking of search results are being developed, which use the link structures of the Web. They are the main innovation with respect to the traditional "mother discipline" of Information Retrieval. From the beginning, link structures of Web pages are applied to commercial search engines in a wide array of variations. From the perspective of scientific information, link topology based approaches were in essence trying to solve a self-created problem: on the one hand, it quickly became clear that the openness of the Web led to an up-tonow unknown increase in available information, but this also caused the quality of the Web pages searched to become a problem - and with it the relevance of the results. The gatekeeper function of traditional information providers, which narrows down every user query to focus on high-quality sources was lacking. Therefore, the recognition of the "authoritativeness" of the Web pages by general search engines such as Google was one of the most important factors for their success.
  13. Candela, G.: ¬An automatic data quality approach to assess semantic data from cultural heritage institutions (2023) 0.01 
    0.014244139 = product of:
  0.035610348 = sum of:
    0.015800884 = weight(_text_:of in 997) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.015800884 = score(doc=997,freq=8.0), product of:
        0.06532493 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04177434 = queryNorm
        0.24188137 = fieldWeight in 997, product of:
          2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
            8.0 = termFreq=8.0
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=997)
    0.019809462 = product of:
      0.039618924 = sum of:
        0.039618924 = weight(_text_:22 in 997) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.039618924 = score(doc=997,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.14628662 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04177434 = queryNorm
            0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 997, 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=997)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.4 = coord(2/5)
    Abstract
    In recent years, cultural heritage institutions have been exploring the benefits of applying Linked Open Data to their catalogs and digital materials. Innovative and creative methods have emerged to publish and reuse digital contents to promote computational access, such as the concepts of Labs and Collections as Data. Data quality has become a requirement for researchers and training methods based on artificial intelligence and machine learning. This article explores how the quality of Linked Open Data made available by cultural heritage institutions can be automatically assessed. The results obtained can be useful for other institutions who wish to publish and assess their collections.
    Date
    22. 6.2023 18:23:31
    Source
    Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology. 74(2023) no.7, S.866-878
  14. Khiat, A.; Benaissa, M.: Approach for instance-based ontology alignment : using argument and event structures of generative lexicon (2014) 0.01 
    0.013757661 = product of:
  0.034394152 = sum of:
    0.009978054 = product of:
      0.04989027 = sum of:
        0.04989027 = weight(_text_:problem in 1577) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.04989027 = score(doc=1577,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17731056 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.244485 = idf(docFreq=1723, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04177434 = queryNorm
            0.28137225 = fieldWeight in 1577, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              4.244485 = idf(docFreq=1723, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1577)
      0.2 = coord(1/5)
    0.024416098 = weight(_text_:of in 1577) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.024416098 = score(doc=1577,freq=26.0), product of:
        0.06532493 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04177434 = queryNorm
        0.37376386 = fieldWeight in 1577, product of:
          5.0990195 = tf(freq=26.0), with freq of:
            26.0 = termFreq=26.0
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1577)
  0.4 = coord(2/5)
    Abstract
    Ontology alignment became a very important problem to ensure semantic interoperability for different sources of information heterogeneous and distributed. Instance-based ontology alignment represents a very promising technique to find semantic correspondences between entities of different ontologies when they contain a lot of instances. In this paper, we describe a new approach to manage ontologies that do not share common instances.This approach extracts the argument and event structures from a set of instances of the concept of the source ontology and compared them with other semantic features extracted from a set of instances of the concept of the target ontology using Generative Lexicon Theory. We show that it is theoretically powerful because it is based on linguistic semantics and useful in practice. We present the experimental results obtained by running our approach on Biblio test of Benchmark series of OAEI 2011. The results show the good performance of our approach.
  15. Mayr, P.; Petras, V.: Building a Terminology Network for Search : the KoMoHe project (2008) 0.01 
    0.013397372 = product of:
  0.03349343 = sum of:
    0.013683967 = weight(_text_:of in 2618) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.013683967 = score(doc=2618,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.06532493 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04177434 = queryNorm
        0.20947541 = fieldWeight in 2618, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=2618)
    0.019809462 = product of:
      0.039618924 = sum of:
        0.039618924 = weight(_text_:22 in 2618) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.039618924 = score(doc=2618,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.14628662 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04177434 = queryNorm
            0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 2618, 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=2618)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.4 = coord(2/5)
    Abstract
    The paper reports about results on the GESIS-IZ project "Competence Center Modeling and Treatment of Semantic Heterogeneity" (KoMoHe). KoMoHe supervised a terminology mapping effort, in which 'cross-concordances' between major controlled vocabularies were organized, created and managed. In this paper we describe the establishment and implementation of crossconcordances for search in a digital library (DL).
    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
  16. Dobrev, P.; Kalaydjiev, O.; Angelova, G.: From conceptual structures to semantic interoperability of content (2007) 0.01 
    0.013146362 = product of:
  0.032865904 = sum of:
    0.018716287 = weight(_text_:of in 4607) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.018716287 = score(doc=4607,freq=22.0), product of:
        0.06532493 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04177434 = queryNorm
        0.28651062 = fieldWeight in 4607, product of:
          4.690416 = tf(freq=22.0), with freq of:
            22.0 = termFreq=22.0
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4607)
    0.0141496165 = product of:
      0.028299233 = sum of:
        0.028299233 = weight(_text_:22 in 4607) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.028299233 = score(doc=4607,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.14628662 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04177434 = queryNorm
            0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 4607, 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=4607)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.4 = coord(2/5)
    Abstract
    Smart applications behave intelligently because they understand at least partially the context where they operate. To do this, they need not only a formal domain model but also formal descriptions of the data they process and their own operational behaviour. Interoperability of smart applications is based on formalised definitions of all their data and processes. This paper studies the semantic interoperability of data in the case of eLearning and describes an experiment and its assessment. New content is imported into a knowledge-based learning environment without real updates of the original domain model, which is encoded as a knowledge base of conceptual graphs. A component called mediator enables the import by assigning dummy metadata annotations for the imported items. However, some functionality of the original system is lost, when processing the imported content, due to the lack of proper metadata annotation which cannot be associated fully automatically. So the paper presents an interoperability scenario when appropriate content items are viewed from the perspective of the original world and can be (partially) reused there.
    Source
    Conceptual structures: knowledge architectures for smart applications: 15th International Conference on Conceptual Structures, ICCS 2007, Sheffield, UK, July 22 - 27, 2007 ; proceedings. Eds.: U. Priss u.a
  17. Gemberling, T.: Thema and FRBR's third group (2010) 0.01 
    0.01297504 = product of:
  0.0324376 = sum of:
    0.009978054 = product of:
      0.04989027 = sum of:
        0.04989027 = weight(_text_:problem in 4158) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.04989027 = score(doc=4158,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17731056 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.244485 = idf(docFreq=1723, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04177434 = queryNorm
            0.28137225 = fieldWeight in 4158, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              4.244485 = idf(docFreq=1723, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4158)
      0.2 = coord(1/5)
    0.022459546 = weight(_text_:of in 4158) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.022459546 = score(doc=4158,freq=22.0), product of:
        0.06532493 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04177434 = queryNorm
        0.34381276 = fieldWeight in 4158, product of:
          4.690416 = tf(freq=22.0), with freq of:
            22.0 = termFreq=22.0
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4158)
  0.4 = coord(2/5)
    Abstract
    The treatment of subjects by Functional Requirements for Bibliographic Records (FRBR) has attracted less attention than some of its other aspects, but there seems to be a general consensus that it needs work. While some have proposed elaborating its subject categories-concepts, objects, events, and places-to increase their semantic complexity, a working group of the International Federation of Library Associations and Institutions (IFLA) has recently made a promising proposal that essentially bypasses those categories in favor of one entity, thema. This article gives an overview of the proposal and discusses its relevance to another difficult problem, ambiguities in the establishment of headings for buildings.Use of dynamic links from subject-based finding aids to records for electronic resources in the OPAC is suggested as one method for by-passing the OPAC search interface, thus making the library's electronic resources more accessible. This method simplifies maintenance of links to electronic resources and aids instruction by providing a single, consistent access point to them. Results of a usage study from before and after this project was completed show a consistent, often dramatic increase in use of the library's electronic resources.
  18. Dahlberg, I.: Kompatibilität und Integration : Probleme und Lösungen in der Wissensorganisation (2008) 0.01 
    0.012355096 = product of:
  0.030887738 = sum of:
    0.008315044 = product of:
      0.041575223 = sum of:
        0.041575223 = weight(_text_:problem in 1677) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.041575223 = score(doc=1677,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17731056 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.244485 = idf(docFreq=1723, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04177434 = queryNorm
            0.23447686 = fieldWeight in 1677, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              4.244485 = idf(docFreq=1723, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1677)
      0.2 = coord(1/5)
    0.022572692 = weight(_text_:of in 1677) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.022572692 = score(doc=1677,freq=32.0), product of:
        0.06532493 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04177434 = queryNorm
        0.34554482 = fieldWeight in 1677, product of:
          5.656854 = tf(freq=32.0), with freq of:
            32.0 = termFreq=32.0
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1677)
  0.4 = coord(2/5)
    Abstract
    The trend in the fifties and sixties of the past century away from the use of universal classification systems such as the UDC towards establishing thesauri in special subject fields for the description of the conceptual contents of documents lead documentalists soon to realize that the necessary common tool for a collaboration among centers of similar subject fields was lacking. Therefore compatibility and integration studies began between the different thesauri of such fields, leading often to more comprehensive thesauri, such as macrothesauri. The paper describes this historic development and also the solutions found at the 1995 ISKO-Conference in Warsaw/Poland on Compatibility and Integration as given in its papers, its recommendations and also in the conceptual frame of its comprehensive bibliography on this topic. In conclusion a new solution is presented oriented toward combining the use of a universal classification system with the new developments of ontologies and their problem of interoperability and heterogeneity.
    Content
    Enthält im Anhang (S.48-49) die: "Recommendations of the Research Seminar on Compatibility and Integration of Order Systems organized by the International Society fpr Knowledge Organization (ISKO) and the Society for Professional Information (TIP), Warsaw, Poland, September 13-15, 1995".
    Source
    Kompatibilität, Medien und Ethik in der Wissensorganisation - Compatibility, Media and Ethics in Knowledge Organization: Proceedings der 10. Tagung der Deutschen Sektion der Internationalen Gesellschaft für Wissensorganisation Wien, 3.-5. Juli 2006 - Proceedings of the 10th Conference of the German Section of the International Society of Knowledge Organization Vienna, 3-5 July 2006. Ed.: H.P. Ohly, S. Netscher u. K. Mitgutsch
  19. Levergood, B.; Farrenkopf, S.; Frasnelli, E.: ¬The specification of the language of the field and interoperability : cross-language access to catalogues and online libraries (CACAO) (2008) 0.01 
    0.012209262 = product of:
  0.030523153 = sum of:
    0.013543615 = weight(_text_:of in 2646) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.013543615 = score(doc=2646,freq=8.0), product of:
        0.06532493 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04177434 = queryNorm
        0.20732689 = fieldWeight in 2646, product of:
          2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
            8.0 = termFreq=8.0
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2646)
    0.016979538 = product of:
      0.033959076 = sum of:
        0.033959076 = weight(_text_:22 in 2646) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.033959076 = score(doc=2646,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.14628662 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04177434 = queryNorm
            0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 2646, 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=2646)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.4 = coord(2/5)
    Abstract
    The CACAO Project (Cross-language Access to Catalogues and Online Libraries) has been designed to implement natural language processing and cross-language information retrieval techniques to provide cross-language access to information in libraries, a critical issue in the linguistically diverse European Union. This project report addresses two metadata-related challenges for the library community in this context: "false friends" (identical words having different meanings in different languages) and term ambiguity. The possible solutions involve enriching the metadata with attributes specifying language or the source authority file, or associating potential search terms to classes in a classification system. The European Library will evaluate an early implementation of this work in late 2008.
    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
  20. Bittner, T.; Donnelly, M.; Winter, S.: Ontology and semantic interoperability (2006) 0.01 
    0.012209262 = product of:
  0.030523153 = sum of:
    0.013543615 = weight(_text_:of in 4820) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.013543615 = score(doc=4820,freq=8.0), product of:
        0.06532493 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04177434 = queryNorm
        0.20732689 = fieldWeight in 4820, product of:
          2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
            8.0 = termFreq=8.0
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4820)
    0.016979538 = product of:
      0.033959076 = sum of:
        0.033959076 = weight(_text_:22 in 4820) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.033959076 = score(doc=4820,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.14628662 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04177434 = queryNorm
            0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 4820, 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=4820)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.4 = coord(2/5)
    Abstract
    One of the major problems facing systems for Computer Aided Design (CAD), Architecture Engineering and Construction (AEC) and Geographic Information Systems (GIS) applications today is the lack of interoperability among the various systems. When integrating software applications, substantial di culties can arise in translating information from one application to the other. In this paper, we focus on semantic di culties that arise in software integration. Applications may use di erent terminologies to describe the same domain. Even when appli-cations use the same terminology, they often associate di erent semantics with the terms. This obstructs information exchange among applications. To cir-cumvent this obstacle, we need some way of explicitly specifying the semantics for each terminology in an unambiguous fashion. Ontologies can provide such specification. It will be the task of this paper to explain what ontologies are and how they can be used to facilitate interoperability between software systems used in computer aided design, architecture engineering and construction, and geographic information processing.
    Date
    3.12.2016 18:39:22

Authors

Years

Languages

  • e 154
  • d 21

Themes